Grant v. Community School Dist. 29
Decision Date | 11 March 1985 |
Citation | 109 A.D.2d 797,486 N.Y.S.2d 309 |
Parties | , 23 Ed. Law Rep. 996 In the Matter of Mary L. GRANT, Respondent, v. COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT 29, et al., Appellants. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Frederick A.O. Schwarz, Jr., Corp. Counsel, New York City (Francis F. Caputo and Miriam Skolnik, New York City, of counsel), for appellants.
James R. Sandner, New York City (Donald Congress, New York City, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MANGANO, J.P., and GIBBONS, BRACKEN and NIEHOFF, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, the appeal is from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 19, 1983, as upon granting the petition, remitted the matter to the Board of Education of the City School District of the City of New York (hereinafter the board of education) to determine the amount of line-of-duty disability payments due petitioner beginning on March 15, 1982.
Judgment reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and that branch of the petition which seeks line-of-duty disability payments denied.
Petitioner Mary L. Grant was injured in the line of duty in October, 1980. As a result of her injury she received line-of-duty disability pay through mid-September, 1981. The medical director of Community School District 29 found her fit and ordered petitioner to return to work on September 17, 1981. Pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement covering petitioner, she demanded review by an independent medical arbitrator.
On January 12, 1982, the arbitrator determined that petitioner was unfit for duty as a typing teacher. However, he expressed the opinion that "she could perform full duties as another type of teacher which would not involve the use of the left arm and elbow as much as is necessary" as a typing teacher "as of February 1, 1982". Petitioner's line-of-duty disability leave was accordingly extended until February 1 and by letter dated February 4, 1982 the executive director of the board of education informed petitioner of the arbitrator's findings and asked her to contact an employee of the board for a new assignment.
The Community School District and the board of education attempted to implement the part of the decision that petitioner could serve as another type of teacher, which they essentially concede on appeal was made in excess of the arbitrator's authority, by ordering petitioner to accept a teaching assignment outside her license area, to begin March 16, 1982.
She refused to do so and instead applied to the New York City Teacher's Retirement System...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Matter of Pace v New York City Department of Education, 2008 NY Slip Op 32086(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 7/21/2008)
...be accepted as final and binding by the Board and the teacher. (Emphasis supplied) (Cross Motion, Ex. B). In Grant v. Community School District 29, 109 A.D.2d 797 (2d Dept 1985), petitioner challenged the DOE's denial of LODI disability payments. In that case, the Appellate Division, Second......