Karin v. Board of Ed. of Central School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of New Hartford, Kirkland and Paris, Oneida County

• Decision Date: 07 December 1970
• Citation: 317 N.Y.S.2d 465,65 Misc.2d 179
• Parties: In the Matter of the Application of Nora KARIN, Petitioner, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1 OF the TOWNS OF NEW HARTFORD, KIRKLAND AND PARIS, ONEIDA COUNTY, Respondent. For a Review under Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules and Sections 3012 and 3013 of the New York Education Law of a Determination by the Respondent dismissing Petitioner from her position as a teacher.
• Court: New York Supreme Court

Page 465

317 N.Y.S.2d 465

65 Misc.2d 179

In the Matter of the Application of Nora KARIN, Petitioner, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1 OF the TOWNS OF NEW HARTFORD, KIRKLAND AND PARIS, ONEIDA COUNTY, Respondent For a Review under Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules and Sections 3012 and 3013 of the New York Education Law of a Determination by the Respondent dismissing Petitioner from her position as a teacher.

Supreme Court, Oneida County.

Dec. 7, 1970.

Goldbas & Goldbas, Utica, for petitioner Nora Karin.

Kernan & Kernan, Utica, for respondent School District; John Hunt, Utica, of counsel.

Robert D. Stone, Albany, for New York State Education Dept.

MOMORANDUM

JAMES P. O'DONNELL, Justice.

The Petitioner, Nora Karin, brings an Article 78 Proceeding before this Court against the Board of Education of Central School District No. 1, of the Towns of New Hartford, Kirkland and Paris, Oneida County, to set aside the determination of the aforesaid School Board, dismissing the petitioner from her postition as teacher in the said School District. Ewald B. Nyquist, Commissioner for Education for the State of New York, although served with a copy of the Notice of Petition on August 11, 1970, which was returnable August 27, 1970, was not named as a party to this proceeding.

The Petitioner apparently directs her juit against the decision of the School Board. Sometime in the fall of 1969, the School Board served the Petitioner with formal written charges as to her behavior as a teacher in the Oxford Road School. Prior to bringing these charges, there were informal conferences between the Board Members, the Attorney for the Board and the Attorney for the Petitioner.

The Petitioner was charged as follows: 1. She refused to accept the assignment by the Administration to a classroom at the Oxford Road School in January of 1969; 2. She failed to attend, at the Oxford Road School, to perform her duties; 3. She failed to furnish, upon request a medical evidence as to any claim of illness or disability.

On November 5, 1969 and November 11, 1969, a formal hearing was conducted by the School Board with all parties represented by counsel, pursuant to the provisions of the Education Law. There is some dispute as to whether Section 3012 or Section 3013 was applicable. After the hearing, the Board with five (5) members voting, voted to uphold the charges as brought, in which charges warranted dismissal of the Petitioner. Two (2) of the Board Members, although present, abstanined from voting because they were not present at the first meeting of the Board.

Although the parties throughout all the proceedings referred to treated Section 3012 of the Education Law as the applicable section, in reality 3013 was the proper section and they substantially complied with this section.

After the School Board rendered its decision on November 11, 1969, the Petitioner appealed to have the decision reviewed by the Education Commissioner under Section 3013 of the Education Law. The Commissioner, by a decision dated April 15, 1970, dismissed the appeal and upheld the holding of the School District.

Although the petition recites that the Commissioner's dismissal was arbitrary and a capricious abuse of...