Opinion
150244/12, 15355, 15356
06-09-2015
Rachel H. PETERMAN, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. NEW YORK COLLEGE OF TRADITIONAL CHINESE MEDICINE, et al., Defendants–Respondents, John Does 1–10, Defendants.
Sanford Hausler, New York, for appellant. Kaufman Dolowich & Voluck, LLP, New York (George Meierhofer of counsel), for respondents.
Sanford Hausler, New York, for appellant.
Kaufman Dolowich & Voluck, LLP, New York (George Meierhofer of counsel), for respondents.
Opinion Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ellen M. Coin, J.), entered March 8, 2013, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendant's motion to dismiss the cause of action for negligence, and order, same court and Justice, entered on or about July 25, 2013, which, upon renewal and reargument, adhered to the determination on the original motion, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff alleges that defendants were negligent in their preparation, provision and grading of a written final examination required for her to obtain a degree upon the completion of all course work. These allegations go to the core of defendants' substantive evaluation of plaintiff's academic performance and are therefore beyond judicial review (Matter of Susan M. v. New York Law School, 76 N.Y.2d 241, 557 N.Y.S.2d 297, 556 N.E.2d 1104 [1990] ). Judicial review of the decisions of academic institutions as to their students' academic performance is limited, pursuant to CPLR article 78, to whether the decision was arbitrary and capricious, irrational or in bad faith (id. at 246, 557 N.Y.S.2d 297, 556 N.E.2d 1104 ; Keles v. Trustees of Columbia Univ. in City of N.Y., 74 A.D.3d 435, 903 N.Y.S.2d 18 [1st Dept.2010], lv. denied 16 N.Y.3d 890, 924 N.Y.S.2d 319, 948 N.E.2d 925 [2011], cert. denied ––– U.S. ––––, 132 S.Ct. 255, 181 L.Ed.2d 148 [2011] ).
FRIEDMAN, J.P., ACOSTA, MOSKOWITZ, RICHTER, FEINMAN, JJ., concur.