From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Villalba v. New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 1, 2008
50 A.D.3d 279 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Summary

In Villalba, unlike the instant case, however, the petitioner apparently had not filed an appeal from the "U" rating, which is separate from the grievance procedure.

Summary of this case from Loughlin v. B.O.E. of City Sch. of N.Y.

Opinion

No. 3230.

April 1, 2008.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (William A. Wetzel, J.), entered October 19, 2006, which denied petitioner's application to annul respondent Board of Education's determinations rating her job performance as unsatisfactory and dismissing her from her position as a probationary assistant principal, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Shebitz, Berman Cohen, New York (Julia R. Cohen of counsel), for appellant. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Cheryl Payer of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Gonzalez, J.P., Williams, Catterson and Moskowitz, JJ.


The "U" ratings are unreviewable for failure to exhaust the grievance procedures set forth in the collective bargaining agreement ( Matter of Plummer v Klepak, 48 NY2d 486, cert denied 445 US 952; Matter of Cantres v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 145 AD2d 359, 361).


Summaries of

Villalba v. New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 1, 2008
50 A.D.3d 279 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

In Villalba, unlike the instant case, however, the petitioner apparently had not filed an appeal from the "U" rating, which is separate from the grievance procedure.

Summary of this case from Loughlin v. B.O.E. of City Sch. of N.Y.
Case details for

Villalba v. New York

Case Details

Full title:ZULMA VILLALBA, Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION et…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Apr 1, 2008

Citations

50 A.D.3d 279 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 2895
853 N.Y.S.2d 881

Citing Cases

Matter of Lennon v. Klein

In addition, with respect to petitioner's complaints concerning DOE's failure to provide a mentor or to have…

Loughlin v. B.O.E. of City Sch. of N.Y.

Under these circumstances, the court cannot find that a sole formal observation was sufficient, along with…