Opinion
12-08-2016
In re Rosemarie SYLVESTER, Petitioner–Appellant, v. The NEW YORK CITY BOARD OF EDUCATION, Respondent–Respondent.
Rosemarie Sylvester, appellant pro se. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Marta Ross of counsel), for respondent.
Rosemarie Sylvester, appellant pro se.
Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Marta Ross of counsel), for respondent.
MAZZARELLI, J.P., FRIEDMAN, ACOSTA, ANDRIAS, MOSKOWITZ, JJ.
Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Shlomo S. Hagler, J.), entered December 18, 2014, which denied the petition to vacate an arbitration award finding, inter alia, that petitioner inflicted corporal punishment on a special education student and imposing a $10,000 fine, and dismissed the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 75 and Education Law § 3020–a, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The Hearing Officer's determination was supported by adequate evidence, was rational, and was not arbitrary and capricious (see generally Lackow v. Department of Educ. [or "Board"] of City of N.Y., 51 A.D.3d 563, 567–568, 859 N.Y.S.2d 52 [1st Dept.2008] ). The sustained specifications were supported by the testimony and written statements from four school employees who testified to the injured student's account of the incident, and that a red mark was observed on the student's cheek. The record also showed that petitioner, during a formal classroom observation, exhibited poor planning and ineffective teaching. Petitioner was also habitually late, and admittedly used inappropriate language.
Petitioner's due process rights were not violated because she was provided with notice, an appropriate hearing, and the opportunity to present evidence and cross-examine witnesses (see Matter of Ajeleye v. New York City Dept. of Educ., 112 A.D.3d 425, 976 N.Y.S.2d 68 [1st Dept.2013] ). Nor did petitioner sustain her burden of demonstrating bias or misconduct by the Hearing Officer (see Batyreva v. N.Y.C. Dept. of Educ., 95 A.D.3d 792, 946 N.Y.S.2d 856 [1st Dept.2012] ).
The arbitration award, which imposed a $10,000 fine upon petitioner, does not shock our sense of fairness (see e.g. Stoyer–Rivera v. New York City Bd./ Dept. of Educ., 101 A.D.3d 584, 955 N.Y.S.2d 517 [1st Dept.2012] ).
We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.