Cressinger v. Board of Educ. of City of Newark

• Court: New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division
• Writing for the Court: ARNOLD M. STEIN
• Citation: Cressinger v. Board of Educ. of City of Newark, 606 A.2d 849, 256 N.J.Super. 155 (N.J. Super. App. Div. 1992)
• Decision Date: 01 May 1992
• Parties: , 74 Ed. Law Rep. 934 Sandra CRESSINGER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the CITY OF NEWARK, Defendant-Respondent.

Page 155

256 N.J.Super. 155

606 A.2d 849, 74 Ed. Law Rep. 934

Sandra CRESSINGER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the CITY OF NEWARK, Defendant-Respondent.

Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division.

Submitted March 30, 1992.

Decided May 1, 1992.

Greenberg Margolis, Roseland, for plaintiff-appellant (S.M. Chris Franzblau, of counsel, Glenn R. Turtletaub, on the brief and reply brief).

Marvin L. Comick, Gen. Counsel, Newark, for defendant-respondent (Robin T. McMahon, Associate Counsel, on the brief). Before Judges PETRELLA, A.M. STEIN and KESTIN.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

ARNOLD M. STEIN, J.A.D.

We affirm the Law Division's order granting summary judgment to defendant. We agree with Judge Villanueva's holding that successful completion of a pretrial intervention program is not a favorable termination of a criminal proceeding and does not entitle plaintiff, a board of education employee, to reimbursement of counsel fees under N.J.S.A. 18A:16-6.1.

Plaintiff was employed by the Newark Board of Education as a supervisor of custodians. Her job required her to travel to different schools. While driving from one school to another, her vehicle collided with a van, killing one of the van's passengers. She claimed that an epileptic episode caused her to have the accident.

Defendant was indicted for first degree aggravated manslaughter, N.J.S.A. 2C:11-4c. She was eventually accepted into and completed the Essex County PTI program and her indictment was dismissed. She sought reimbursement for counsel fees under N.J.S.A. 18A:16-6.1:

Should any criminal action be instituted against any ... person [holding any office, position or employment under the jurisdiction of any board of education] for any ... act or omission [arising out of and in the performance of his duties] and should such proceeding be dismissed or result in a final disposition in favor of such person, the board of education shall reimburse him for the cost of defending such proceeding, including reasonable counsel fees and expenses of the original hearing or trial and all appeals. (emphasis added).

In Rubin v. Nowak, 248 N.J.Super. 80, 83, 590 A.2d 249 (App.Div.1991), we held that administrative dismissal of a criminal charge by the prosecutor pursuant to R. 3:25-1 was a favorable termination of a criminal proceeding for the purpose of supporting plaintiff's action for malicious prosecution. We stated in dictum that there is no favorable termination of a criminal proceeding where the accused is accepted in a pretrial intervention program. We said: "The inquiry ... focuses on whether the termination was or was not dispositive as to the accused's innocence of the crime for which he was charged." Id. at 83, 590 A.2d 249.

In Kerwick v. Trenton, 184 N.J.Super. 235, 445 A.2d 482 (Law Div.1982), the Law Division held that a police officer who successfully completed a...