Opinion
March 30, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Stolarik, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
It appears from the record that Special Term correctly ruled that litigation of the petitioner's claim was barred by res judicata and collateral estoppel since the issue of whether the termination of her services as a teacher violated her rights under Education Law § 2585 (3) had been previously raised at, argued before, and resolved by, the arbitrator in the respondent's favor. Moreover, disputes as to matters arising from or involving the above statute are not barred from submission to arbitration (see, Board of Educ. v. Glaubman, 53 N.Y.2d 781).
We further find that the respondent's cross petition to confirm the arbitrator's award was properly granted since, regardless of whether or not he misapplied Education Law § 2585, the arbitrator's award was not irrational, did not violate a strong public policy, and did not exceed a specifically enumerated limitation on his power (see, Matter of Silverman [Benmor Coats], 61 N.Y.2d 299, 308; Matter of Sprinzen [Nomberg], 46 N.Y.2d 623, 629-630). Lawrence, J.P., Eiber, Kunzeman and Sullivan, JJ., concur.