From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Dionisio v. Bd. of Educ. of Mahopac

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 21, 1989
147 A.D.2d 641 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Opinion

February 21, 1989

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Putnam County (Dickinson, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the respondent Board of Education of the Mahopac Central School District.

A school district is not required to rearrange academic schedules in order to recall an excessed teacher on a preferred eligible list (see, Matter of Chauvel v Nyquist, 43 N.Y.2d 48; Matter of Ward v Nyquist, 43 N.Y.2d 57). Since the respondent Board of Education had the authority to reassign the respondent remedial reading teacher to an elementary school position which was within her tenure area (Sweet Home Cent. School Dist. v Sweet Home Educ. Assn., 90 A.D.2d 683, affd 58 N.Y.2d 912), it was not required to refrain from doing so to accommodate the petitioner's reinstatement to an elementary school position. The petitioner was not legally qualified to teach in the vacant remedial reading position. Accordingly, her rights under Education Law § 2510 (3) were not violated. Mangano, J.P., Brown, Eiber and Harwood, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Dionisio v. Bd. of Educ. of Mahopac

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 21, 1989
147 A.D.2d 641 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
Case details for

Matter of Dionisio v. Bd. of Educ. of Mahopac

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of BEATRICE DIONISIO, Appellant, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF…

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

Date published: Feb 21, 1989

Citations

147 A.D.2d 641 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
538 N.Y.S.2d 47