1st Dept. Rulings to Restore Fired NYC Teachers Were Judicial 'Overreach,' Court of Appeals Says
The New York State Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that the terminations of three teachers by the New York City Department of Education did not "shock the conscience" and should not have been set aside by a state appellate court in Manhattan.
January 09, 2018 at 01:41 PM
3 minute read
The New York State Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that the terminations of three teachers by the New York City Department of Education did not “shock the conscience” and should not have been set aside by a state appellate court in Manhattan.
In an unsigned opinion reversing the decisions of the Appellate Division, First Department, in three separate cases, the Court of Appeals restored rulings entered by hearing officers who concluded the firings were appropriate. The judges said the First Department justices improperly reweighed the evidence in each case and substituted its judgment for that of the hearing officers.
The Court of Appeals' unanimous ruling backed the Department of Education's decisions to terminate the jobs of Terrell Williams, a gym teacher who the department said asked eighth-grade girls for the phone numbers of their older siblings; Almira Beatty, a special education teacher who the department said falsified time sheets for meeting with a student; and Ericka Bolt, a fifth-grade teacher who the department said encouraged her students to cheat on a statewide exam.
Court of Appeals Judge Jenny Rivera said in a concurring opinion that the First Department failed to apply well-settled case law in deciding the cases.
“There is no doctrinal complexity or novel issue presented in these appeals that cannot be resolved by reference to existing precedent,” Rivera wrote, saying the First Department partook in an “obvious misapplication of the law” and that the justices' analyses in the cases were “so clearly at odds with uncontroversial, established legal standards.”
Rivera said her decision to write separately in the case was driven in part by the Department of Education's argument that the Court of Appeals should clarify the scope of review in school discipline cases to prevent judicial overreach.
Assistant Corporation Counsel Melanie West represented the city in Bolt's case and Assistant Corporation Counsel Kathy Chang Park appeared in Beatty's and Williams' cases.
“The unanimous and pointed decision of the Court of Appeals speaks volumes, reaffirming that independent labor arbitrators, and not judges, are best-positioned to decide whether teachers should be dismissed or otherwise disciplined for misconduct,” said Law Department spokesman Nicholas Paolucci in an email.
Bryan Glass of Glass Krakower represented Beatty and Williams and Richard Washington, a Manhattan solo attorney, appeared for Bolt.
Washington said in an interview that evidence against his client was insufficient and noted that, before the First Department ruled in the matter, a state Supreme Court justice had also found that firing Bolt was an excessive penalty.
“It's unfortunate that those decisions were reversed and, while I respect the court's decision, I believe Ms. Bolt was innocent and that the system failed her in this matter,” Washington said.
David Saxe, a retired First Department justice who was not involved in the three cases and who is now a partner at Morrison Cohen, said Rivera's concurrence appears to recommend an “enhanced hurdle” for teachers to challenge an administrative decision for their termination.
“It was a shot across the bow for the standards to overcome discipline for teachers,” Saxe said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDOJ Supports Appointing US Judge Backed By Trump to Review Mar-a-Lago Documents
3 minute readJay-Z, Quinn Emanuel Say AAA Offers Only 'Token' Black Arbitrators
Trending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250