From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Guglielmone v. Board of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 28, 1998
253 A.D.2d 880 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

September 28, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Lifson, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the petition is granted, the determination is annulled, and the matter is remitted to the Board of Education of the Sayville Union Free School District to file an affidavit pursuant to Retirement and Social Security Law § 803 Retire. Soc. Sec. (b) (3) stating that the petitioner is eligible for retroactive membership in the New York State Teachers' Retirement System.

The determination denying the petitioner retroactive membership in the retirement system was affected by an error of law. The respondent's determination was premised solely upon the Hearing Officer's erroneous belief that the petitioner's statements to the effect that she was not timely advised of her option to join the r retirement system were legally insufficient to sustain her "substantial evidence" burden of proof under Retirement and Social Security Law § 803 Retire. Soc. Sec. (b) (3) ( see, Matter of Scanlan v. Buffalo Pub. School Sys., 90 N.Y.2d 662; Matter of Hickey v. Board of Coop. Educ. Servs., 250 A.D.2d 768; Matter of Zinman v. Board of Educ., 248 A.D.2d 716; Matter of Dapp v. Board of Educ., 248 A.D.2d 712). Moreover, it is clear that in reviewing the propriety of the challenged determination, the Supreme Court was limited to the grounds and evidence actually relied upon by the respondent's Hearing Officer in reaching the determination ( see, Matter of Scanlan v. Buffalo Pub. School Sys., supra; Matter of Scherbyn v. Wayne-Finger Lakes Bd. of Coop. Educ. Servs., 77 N.Y.2d 753, 758). Therefore, the reliance by the respondent and the Supreme Court upon other hearing evidence as an alternative basis for upholding the challenged determination is improper ( see, Matter of Van Antwerp v. Board of Educ., 247 A.D.2d 676; Matter of Sadoff v. Ithaca City School Dist., 246 A.D.2d 861; Matter of Gordon v. Cold Spring Harbor Cent. School Dist., 247 A.D.2d 387). Inasmuch as the petitioner has sustained her burden of proof under the statute, her petition must be granted.

Mangano, P.J., Sullivan, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Guglielmone v. Board of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 28, 1998
253 A.D.2d 880 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Matter of Guglielmone v. Board of Education

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of VIRGINIA GUGLIELMONE, Appellant, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF…

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

Date published: Sep 28, 1998

Citations

253 A.D.2d 880 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
678 N.Y.S.2d 509

Citing Cases

Ninth Ave. Realty LLC v. City of N.Y.

This statutory language is dispositive in this proceeding as the Administrative Code explicitly states, as…

Jourdain v. N.Y.S. Div. of Hous. & Cmty. Renewal

In sum, since it is undisputed that Marie resided with Scherley for the one-year period immediately prior to…