From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Langston v. Iroquois Central School

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 1, 2002
291 A.D.2d 845 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

TP 01-01854

February 1, 2002.

CPLR article 78 proceeding transferred to this Court by an order of Supreme Court, Erie County (O'Donnell, J.), entered April 26, 2001 seeking to annul a determination suspending petitioner from high school.

LAVIN KLEIMAN, P.C., BUFFALO (JOHN J. LAVIN OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER.

HODGSON RUSS LLP, BUFFALO (LYNDA M. TARANTINO OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTS.

PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., HAYES, HURLBUTT, KEHOE, AND BURNS, JJ.


It is hereby ORDERED that said petition be and the same hereby is unanimously dismissed without costs.

Memorandum:

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking to annul the determination suspending his son from high school. Supreme Court erred in denying respondents' motion to dismiss the proceeding as barred by the doctrine of primary jurisdiction and in transferring the proceeding to this Court pursuant to CPLR 7804 (g). "The doctrine of primary jurisdiction 'applies where a claim is originally cognizable in the courts, and comes into play whenever enforcement of the claim requires the resolution of issues which, under a regulatory scheme, have been placed within the special competence of an administrative body; in such a case the judicial process is suspended pending referral of such issues to the administrative body for its views'" ( Staatsburg Water Co. v. Staatsburg Fire Dist., 72 N.Y.2d 147, 156). Here, petitioner failed to "appeal by petition" to the Commissioner of Education pursuant to Education Law § 310 (7) and thus a court should not exercise jurisdiction in this matter until such an appeal is taken ( see, Matter of Patti Ann H. v. New York Med. Coll., 88 A.D.2d 296, 300-301, affd 58 N.Y.2d 734). Although "[t]here is no fixed formula governing the application of the doctrine [of primary jurisdiction] to the facts of a particular case" ( Heller v. Coca-Cola Co., 230 A.D.2d 768, 769, lv denied in part and dismissed in part 89 N.Y.2d 856), we conclude that the doctrine applies here because the claim depends upon "the specialized knowledge and experience" of the Commissioner of Education ( Matter of Hessney v. Board of Educ., 228 A.D.2d 954, 955, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 801). In view of our determination, we do not address the merits of the petition.


Summaries of

In re Langston v. Iroquois Central School

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 1, 2002
291 A.D.2d 845 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

In re Langston v. Iroquois Central School

Case Details

Full title:MATTER OF RYAN LANGSTON, BY NEXT FRIEND, DANIEL LANGSTON, PETITIONER, v…

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

Date published: Feb 1, 2002

Citations

291 A.D.2d 845 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
736 N.Y.S.2d 815

Citing Cases

Ken–Vil Assocs. Ltd. v. State Div. of Human Rights

The doctrine of primary jurisdiction applies when the determination of an action “ ‘requires the resolution…

W.B. v. Baldwinsville Cent. School Dist.

Petitioner is required to exhaust the administrative remedies available under the Education Law prior to…