From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Zeimer v. City Sch. Dist. of N.Y.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Nov 12, 2020
188 A.D.3d 513 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)

Opinion

12337 12338 Index No. 453215/17 152337/18 Case No. 2019-5274 2019-5277

11-12-2020

In re Nadav ZEIMER, Petitioners-Appellant, v. The CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT OF the CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Respondents-Respondents. In re The City School District of the City of New York, et al., Petitioners-Respondents, v. Nadav Zeimer, Respondent-Appellant.

Glass Harlow & Hogrogian LLP, Pearl River (Jordan F. Harlow of counsel), for appellant. James E. Johnson, Corporation Counsel, New York (Jonathan A. Popolow of counsel), for respondents.


Glass Harlow & Hogrogian LLP, Pearl River (Jordan F. Harlow of counsel), for appellant.

James E. Johnson, Corporation Counsel, New York (Jonathan A. Popolow of counsel), for respondents.

Gische, J.P., Gesmer, Kern, Kennedy, JJ.

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Shlomo Hagler, J.), entered April 25, 2019, which granted the petition of The City School District of the City of New York and Carmen Farina (collectively DOE) seeking to vacate an arbitrator's award, dated December 5, 2017, to the extent that it ordered respondent Nadav Zeimer's reinstatement as Principal of Harlem Renaissance High School, and denied the cross motion to dismiss the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 75, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Judgment, same court and Justice, entered April 25, 2019, denying petitioner Zeimer's petition to enforce the arbitrator's decision to reinstate him to his former position, and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In the article 75 proceeding, the court correctly determined that it had jurisdiction over the proceeding since Education Law § 3020–a(5) specifically provides for judicial review of arbitrator's decisions, pursuant to CPLR 7511. Further, the article 75 court correctly determined that the arbitrator exceeded her authority by ordering the reinstatement of Zeimer as principal to a specific school, as the authority to place pedagogical staff is within DOE's sole purview (see Matter of Adlerstein v. Board of Educ. of City of N.Y ., 64 N.Y.2d 90, 102, 485 N.Y.S.2d 1, 474 N.E.2d 209 [1984] ), and Zeimer was not cleared of all charges against him (see Matter of Einsohn v. New York City Dept. of Educ ., 73 A.D.3d 454, 454, 900 N.Y.S.2d 295 [1st Dept. 2010] ).

Regarding the article 78 proceeding, since the court correctly determined in the article 75 proceeding that Zeimer is not entitled to reinstatement at his formerly assigned school, and that the arbitrator exceeded her authority by rendering a contrary

determination, there is no basis for mandamus relief to enforce the arbitrator's decision (see Matter of Taylor v. Hammondsport Cent. School Dist., 267 A.D.2d 987, 988, 700 N.Y.S.2d 353 [4th Dept. 1999] ).


Summaries of

Zeimer v. City Sch. Dist. of N.Y.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Nov 12, 2020
188 A.D.3d 513 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)
Case details for

Zeimer v. City Sch. Dist. of N.Y.

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Nadav Zeimer, Petitioners-Appellant, v. The City School…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Date published: Nov 12, 2020

Citations

188 A.D.3d 513 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)
132 N.Y.S.3d 295
2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 6476