From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Tadken v. Bd. of Educ, Port Wash. U

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 27, 1978
65 A.D.2d 820 (N.Y. App. Div. 1978)

Opinion

November 27, 1978


In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to require the appellant to reinstate the petitioner as a tenured teacher in appellant's school district, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated January 19, 1977, which granted the petition. Judgment affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. Contrary to the appellant's contention, section 3813 Educ. of the Education Law is not applicable since petitioner seeks to vindicate the public interest in the enforcement of tenure rights (see Union Free School Dist. No. 6 of Towns of Islip Smithtown v New York State Human Rights Appeal Bd., 43 A.D.2d 749, affd 35 N.Y.2d 371, mot for rearg den 36 N.Y.2d 807; Ruocco v Doyle, 38 A.D.2d 132; but cf. Flanagan v Board of Educ., 63 A.D.2d 1013 ; Matter of Grey v Board of Educ., 60 A.D.2d 361). Regarding petitioner's tenure status we find that she never lost the tenure she acquired in 1966. Under the circumstances existent in this case petitioner did not lose her tenure when she accepted a part-time position. Latham, J.P., Titone, Margett and Hawkins, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Tadken v. Bd. of Educ, Port Wash. U

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 27, 1978
65 A.D.2d 820 (N.Y. App. Div. 1978)
Case details for

Matter of Tadken v. Bd. of Educ, Port Wash. U

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ELLEN TADKEN, Respondent, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION, PORT…

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

Date published: Nov 27, 1978

Citations

65 A.D.2d 820 (N.Y. App. Div. 1978)

Citing Cases

Sephton v. Board of Education

Such circumstances cannot be allowed, however, to obscure the fact that advantages which accrue to these…

Matter Piaggone v. Bd. of Educ

We note that Special Term correctly concluded that petitioner was not required to file a notice of claim…