Bradford Central School Dist. v. Ambach
| Decision Date | 11 May 1982 |
| Citation | 56 N.Y.2d 158,436 N.E.2d 1256,451 N.Y.S.2d 654 |
| Parties | , 436 N.E.2d 1256, 5 Ed. Law Rep. 189 In the Matter of BRADFORD CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellant, v. Gordon M. AMBACH, as Commissioner of Education of the State of New York, et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
The question raised by this appeal is whether the Commissioner of Education acted in excess of his statutory authority when he granted a permanent teaching certificate to an employee of petitioner, Bradford Central School District. Before reaching that substantive issue, a threshold procedural question must be addressed. That question is whether the school district, as employer, has standing to challenge the commissioner's determination.
The facts of this case are not in dispute. Since the fall of 1972, respondent Gerrie A. Yanch has been employed as a music teacher by the Bradford Central School District. She was granted tenure at the end of her three-year probationary period. Although her supervisors had expressed dissatisfaction with her work in recent years, no formal charges were pending against her at the time this dispute over the status of her certification arose.
In July of 1979, school officials realized their records did not indicate that Yanch had ever received permanent certification from the Commissioner of Education. Therefore, they requested verification of her status from the commissioner. At the same time, Yanch applied for permanent certification from the commissioner.
The commissioner notified Yanch that she did not qualify for permanent certification because her training did not include student teaching experience, but that one year of paid full-time teaching experience could be substituted for that requirement on the recommendation of the administrator of the employing school district. The superintendent of the Bradford Central Schools refused to give Yanch the required recommendation despite her seven years of teaching experience in that district. She then requested that the commissioner waive the recommendation requirement. The commissioner determined that the superintendent of the school district was unreasonably withholding his recommendation; that "fair and equitable treatment" required that the student teaching requirement be waived for a teacher employed seven years by the same school district; and that Yanch was entitled to permanent certification.
The school district commenced this article 78 proceeding seeking to annul the commissioner's determination on the ground that it was arbitrary and capricious because the commissioner lacks the authority to waive any requirement imposed by regulation. The applicable regulation allows "year of paid, full-time teaching experience" to be accepted as a substitute for the student teaching experience "when such experience carries the recommendation of the employing school district administrator." (8 NYCRR 80.17 Petitioner argues that without specific authorization from the Board of Regents allowing the commissioner to waive such requirements, he is bound to strictly adhere to the dictates of the regulations.
Trial court agreed with petitioner's arguments and annulled the determination of the Commissioner of Education on the ground that he was bound by the requirements of the regulation. Prior to reaching the substantive issue, the trial court found that the board of education was more than a "concerned bystander" and did have standing to challenge the commissioner's determination. Citing the school board's statutory obligation to employ only qualified teachers (Education Law, § 1709, subd. 16; § 3010), the court described the commissioner's determination as one which "directly and immediately affects matters which are the legitimate concern of the Board of Education."
The Appellate Division reversed and dismissed the petition on the ground that the school board did not have standing because it was not aggrieved by the commissioner's determination. Furthermore, the court noted that questions of certification relate to a person's "right to be licensed generally * * * and does not directly concern the district in its employer-employee relationship".
We now hold the board of education, as employer of the teacher granted permanent certification, has standing to challenge the commissioner's determination, and we further hold that the determination of the commissioner should be upheld. Since we reach the same result as the Appellate Division, but for different reasons, the order of the Appellate Division dismissing the petition brought by the Bradford Central School District should be affirmed.
A school board is responsible for insuring that only qualified persons, as defined by sections 3001 and 3006 of the Education Law and the regulations promulgated thereunder, are employed to teach. A teacher who is not certified by the State is unqualified as a matter of law and cannot be employed or paid by a public school board of education. (Education Law, §§ 3001,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of New York v. State
...New York, 60 N.Y.2d, at 442, 470 N.Y.S.2d 113, 458 N.E.2d 354; Community Bd. 7, supra; cf., Matter of Bradford Cent. School Dist. v. Ambach, 56 N.Y.2d 158, 163-164, 451 N.Y.S.2d 654, 436 N.E.2d 1256). Moreover, neither the majority nor defendants point to anything negating the inference of ......
-
Rex Paving Corp. v. White
...intent negating review ( id., at 442-443, 470 N.Y.S.2d 113, 458 N.E.2d 354). ( See also, Matter of Bradford Cent. School Dist. v. Ambach, 56 N.Y.2d 158, 163-164, 451 N.Y.S.2d 654, 436 N.E.2d 1256; Matter of Dairylea Coop. v. Walkley, 38 N.Y.2d 6, 10-11, 337 N.Y.S.2d 451, 339 N.E.2d 865.) He......
-
Daniel C., Matter of
...claims. While the liberal zone of interest test for review of administrative action (see, e.g., Matter of Bradford Cent. School Dist. v. Ambach, 56 N.Y.2d 158, 451 N.Y.S.2d 654, 436 N.E.2d 1256; Matter of Morgenthau v. Cooke, supra; Matter of Douglaston Civic Ass'n v. Calvin, supra ) does n......
-
City of New York v. City Civil Service Com'n
...of Dairylea Coop. v. Walkley, 38 N.Y.2d 6, 8-11, 377 N.Y.S.2d 451, 339 N.E.2d 865 and Matter of Bradford Cent. School Dist. v. Ambach, 56 N.Y.2d 158, 163-164, 451 N.Y.S.2d 654, 436 N.E.2d 1256, we set forth three criteria for standing. Special Term refused to apply the factors identified in......