From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Polskin v. Board of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 23, 1975
49 A.D.2d 968 (N.Y. App. Div. 1975)

Opinion

October 23, 1975


Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent, the Board of Education, Kinderhook Central School District, Columbia County, which suspended petitioner from his teaching position for a period of two years without pay. Petitioner, a tenured fourth grade teacher, challenges the respondent's decision on several grounds, none of which we find to have merit. The Commissioner's regulations, promulgated under section 3020-a Educ. of the Education Law have remedied any constitutional infirmity in the enforcement of that section (Hodgkins v Central School Dist. No. 1, 48 A.D.2d 302; see Kinsella v Board of Educ. of Central School Dist. No. 7 of Towns of Amherst Tonawanda, 378 F. Supp. 54). Nor was there a violation of due process in petitioner's suspension prior to a hearing (Hodgkins v Central School Dist. No. 1, supra). Moreover, this issue is moot since the respondent awarded petitioner full pay for the period between his suspension and its final determination (see Matter of Jerry v Board of Educ. of City School Dist. of City of Syracuse, 44 A.D.2d 198, mod on other grounds 35 N.Y.2d 534), any injury to petitioner has been remedied and no future injury is threatened (Matter of Donohue v Cornelius, 17 N.Y.2d 390). Additionally, the contention that the decision was arbitrary, capricious and an abuse of discretion, unsupported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole, has no basis in the instant case (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale Mamaroneck, 34 N.Y.2d 222; Matter of Sowa v Looney, 23 N.Y.2d 329; Matter of Miller v Lomenzo, 43 A.D.2d 997). Nor can it be said that the punishment is "so disproportionate to the offense, in the light of the circumstances, as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness" (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale Mamaroneck, supra; Matter of McDermott v Murphy, 15 A.D.2d 479, affd 12 N.Y.2d 780; Matter of Stolz v Board of Regents of Univ. of State of N.Y., 4 A.D.2d 361). Accordingly, the determination should be confirmed. Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Sweeney, J.P., Kane, Koreman, Larkin and Reynolds, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Polskin v. Board of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 23, 1975
49 A.D.2d 968 (N.Y. App. Div. 1975)
Case details for

Matter of Polskin v. Board of Education

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of HARVEY H. POLSKIN, Petitioner, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF…

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

Date published: Oct 23, 1975

Citations

49 A.D.2d 968 (N.Y. App. Div. 1975)

Citing Cases

Matter of Kinsella v. Board of Education

We need not dwell on petitioner's challenge to the constitutionality of the newly amended regulations. The…

Amos v. Board of Education of Cheektowaga-Sloan Union Free School District

She urges that the Commissioner of Education acted in excess of his delegated authority by adopting…