Moreover, it is not clear how she could obtain, on June 4, 1936, a two-year maternity leave, when, according to the record, her per diem service ended on April 30, 1936, and she merely held a temporary one-year appointment that, it is fair to assume, expired that very June. It would appear that her service record was broken and constituted a termination of her relations. ( Matter of Doering v. Hinrichs, 289 N.Y. 29; Matter of Marcus v. Ingersoll, 266 N.Y. 359; Matter of Abrams v. Ryan, 244 A.D. 284.) Petitioner further urges that, in any event, respondent should have appointed her as a regular teacher on an annual salary on June 25, 1936, when other per diem swimming teachers in service on April 1, 1936, were appointed.