Capodilupo v. Board of Educ. of West Orange Tp., Essex County

Citation528 A.2d 73,218 N.J.Super. 510
Parties, 40 Ed. Law Rep. 824 Philip CAPODILUPO, Petitioner-Respondent, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the TOWNSHIP OF WEST ORANGE, ESSEX COUNTY, Respondent-Appellant, and Margaret Savage and Patti Van Cauwenberge, Intervenors-Respondents.
Decision Date02 July 1987
CourtNew Jersey Superior Court – Appellate Division

Stephen J. Christiano, West Orange, for respondent-appellant (Samuel A. Christiano, attorney; Stephen J. Christiano, on the brief).

Richard A. Friedman, Pennington, for petitioner-respondent (Ruhlman, Butrym & Friedman, attorneys; Richard A. Friedman, on the brief).

Alfred F. Maurice, Hackensack, for intervenor-respondent Savage.

Ellis I. Medoway, Deputy Atty. Gen., for the State Bd. of Educ. (W. Cary Edwards, Atty. Gen., attorney; James J. Ciancia, Asst. Atty. Gen., of counsel and Ellis I. Medoway, on the brief).

Susan E. Galante, Trenton, amicus curiae for N.J. School Boards Ass'n (Russell Weiss, Jr., General Counsel; Susan E. Galante, on the brief).

Before Judges PRESSLER, BAIME and ASHBEY.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

ASHBEY, J.A.D.

On February 27, 1984, petitioner Philip Capodilupo's future employment as secondary school physical education teacher for the 1984-1985 school year was terminated by the Board of Education of the Township of West Orange (Board) pursuant to a reduction in force of its teaching staff (RIF). See N.J.S.A. 18A:28-9 et seq. He appealed to the Commissioner of Education (Commissioner), contending that he should have been offered one of two elementary physical education teaching positions held by two non-tenured employees who were retained despite the RIF. 1 The matter was heard by an administrative law judge (ALJ). On March 19, 1985, the ALJ found that petitioner was entitled to reinstatement to either disputed elementary physical education teaching position. Specifically, the ALJ recommended Capodilupo's reinstatement to the position of Kevin Reilly, who had not intervened before the Commissioner. He also found him entitled to replace Margaret Savage, who had intervened. The Commissioner rejected these recommended decisions of the ALJ in their entirety, upholding the Board's retention of both Reilly and Savage. The State Board of Education (State Board) reversed the determination of the Commissioner and the Board concerning Capodilupo's entitlement to Reilly's position and sustained the Commissioner and the Board concerning the Board's decision to retain Savage. The Board appeals from the State Board's ruling that Capodilupo was entitled to Reilly's position. We affirm. 2

Capodilupo had been employed by the Board for five consecutive school years teaching secondary school physical education classes. He held the required State-issued teaching certificate endorsed in both elementary and secondary physical education and had acquired tenure. 3 He had never taught elementary physical education. Thus, he was a tenured teacher seeking reinstatement to a position for which he was certified, but in which he had acquired no demonstrable experience. Both of the candidates whom he sought to replace had experience in the elementary school position and were certified, but had not acquired tenure. Capodilupo claimed these facts gave him seniority over the selected candidates within the meaning of the education law. In the alternative, he urged that, where no candidate has seniority but one has tenure, tenure must prevail. See Lichtman v. Ridgewood Bd. of Ed., 93 N.J. 362, 461 A.2d 158 (1983); Spiewak v. Rutherford Bd. of Ed., 90 N.J. 63, 447 A.2d 140 (1982). 4

We first address Capodilupo's claim to seniority. N.J.A.C. 6:3-1.10(b) states that "[s]eniority ... shall be determined according to the number of academic or calendar years of employment ... in specific categories ..." Both the Commissioner and the State Board agreed that Capodilupo possessed no seniority rights concerning the elementary school position because elementary physical education teaching and secondary physical education teaching are separate seniority categories, see N.J.A.C. 6:3-1.10(1)(15)(iii). The Board contends that this conclusion ends the inquiry under N.J.S.A. 18A:28-9 et seq., which mandates that RIFFED teachers be dismissed and rehired in order of "seniority" as determined under the regulations. The Commissioner agreed, concluding that Capodilupo's lack of seniority as an elementary teacher precluded his claim for reinstatement to that position and equating Capodilupo's tenure claim with his lack of seniority.

In reversing the Commissioner, the State Board first reasoned that Capodilupo had tenure in all positions for which his instructional certificate qualified him, including elementary physical education, even though he did not have seniority in that category. Perceiving a gap in the RIF legislation from the use of the word "seniority" and the absence of reference to "tenure," the State Board relied upon its quasi-legislative responsibility to balance "the protection afforded tenured teaching staff members by N.J.S.A. 18A:28-5 and the authority granted to district boards of education by N.J.S.A. 18A:28-9." It ruled that district boards are obliged to take into consideration the tenure rights of individuals affected by a RIF. 5

In support of this conclusion, the State Board noted that seniority provides a mechanism for ranking all tenured teaching staff members so that reductions among the tenured force can be effected in an equitable fashion and in accord with sound educational policies. See Lichtman v. Ridgewood Bd. of Ed., supra, 93 N.J. at 368, 461 A.2d 158. A tenured teacher, however, is entitled to retention as against a non-tenured teacher under the tenure law. To hold otherwise would be to defeat the purpose of tenure which was to give a measure of security to teachers after the prescribed number of years of service. See Viemeister v. Bd. of Education of Prospect Park, 5 N.J.Super. 215, 218, 68 A.2d 768 (App.Div.1949).

We agree. While it is well-established that the right to tenure is statutory, Spiewak v. Rutherford Bd. of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Petition of United Parcel Service, Inc.
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court – Appellate Division
    • March 16, 1992
    ...Matter of Sheriff's Officer (PC2209J), 226 N.J.Super. 17, 21, 543 A.2d 462 (App.Div.1988); Capodilupo v. W. Orange Tp. Ed. Bd., 218 N.J.Super. 510, 516, 528 A.2d 73 (App.Div.), Icertif. denied, 109 N.J. 514, 537 A.2d 1300 (1987). Our Supreme Court has more recently further noted that the sh......
  • Nelson v. Board of Educ. of Tp. of Old Bridge
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • March 12, 1997
    ...will not be upset unless unreasonable, unsupported by the record or violative of the legislative will." Capodilupo v. Board of Educ., 218 N.J.Super. 510, 515, 528 A.2d 73 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 109 N.J. 514, 537 A.2d 1300 (1987). As this Court noted in The Legislature intended that the......
  • Bower v. Board of Educ. of City of East Orange
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • June 10, 1997
    ...will not be upset unless unreasonable, unsupported by the record or violative of the legislative will." Capodilupo v. Board of Educ., 218 N.J.Super. 510, 515, 528 A.2d 73 (App.Div.) (citation omitted), certif. denied, 109 N.J. 514, 537 A.2d 1300 (1987); see also G.E. Solid State, Inc. v. Di......
  • Impey v. Board of Educ. of Borough of Shrewsbury
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • August 14, 1995
    ...laws." Ibid. (citing Dore v. Bd. of Educ., 185 N.J.Super. 447, 452, 449 A.2d 547 (App.Div.1982)). See also Capodilupo v. Bd. of Educ., 218 N.J.Super. 510, 515, 528 A.2d 73 (App.Div.) (holding that final decision of State Board of Education should not be upset unless unreasonable, and unsupp......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT