Summary
holding that, where Commissioner approved five-day suspension under N.Y. Educ. Law § 3214(b), student and other plaintiffs were barred from relitigating the propriety of the suspension in a civil lawsuit
Summary of this case from Wisniewski v. Board of Educ. of Weedsport Central SchoolOpinion
Submitted May 17, 1999
July 6, 1999
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for alleged educational malpractice, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burke, J.), dated April 30, 1998, which granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Wolin Wolin, Jericho, N.Y. (Alan E. Wolin of counsel), for appellants.
Guercio Guercio, Farmingdale, N.Y. (Gary L. Steffanetta of counsel), for respondents.
GUY JAMES MANGANO, P.J., THOMAS R. SULLIVAN, GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, LEO F. McGINITY, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiffs appealed the plaintiff Michael Livolsi's five-day suspension from high school to the New York State Commissioner of Education, who made a determination in the respondents' favor. The plaintiffs never sought judicial review of the Commissioner's determination pursuant to CPLR article 78, although they could have done so. Therefore, the plaintiffs are barred by the doctrines of collateral estoppel and res judicata from relitigating the propriety of the suspension ( see, e.g., Matter of Camperlengo v. Barell, 78 N.Y.2d 674; Ryan v. New York Tel. Co., 62 N.Y.2d 494, 497).
Moreover, the plaintiffs' cause of action sounding in "negligence" is clearly based upon alleged "educational malpractice". As a matter of public policy, such a cause of action cannot be entertained by the courts of this State ( see, Hoffman v. Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 49 N.Y.2d 121, 125; Donohue v. Copiague Union Free School Dist., 47 N.Y.2d 440; Helbig v. City of New York, 212 A.D.2d 506).
Accordingly, the complaint was properly dismissed.