Kaufman v. Anker
Cases that cite this one
17 later published cases cite this decision.
- Orshan v. Anker (District Court, E.D. New York 1982)
- Von Gizycki v. Levy (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)
- Bigler v. Cornell University (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1999)
- Barrett Japaning, Inc. v. Bialobroda (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
- Barrett Japaning, Inc. v. Bialobroda (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
- Matter of Halcomb v. New York City Dept. of Hous. Preserv. & Dev. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
- Matter of Brickhouse v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
- Matter of Kostic v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
- Matter of Brickhouse v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
- Matter of Kostic v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
- Matter of Willoughby Operating Co., LLC v. New York City Economic Dev. Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
- Matter of Willoughby Operating Co., LLC v. New York City Economic Dev. Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
- Storman v. New York City Department of Education (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- Climent v. Board of Education of Community School District No. 22 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2001)
- Frasier v. Board of Education (N.Y. 1988)
- Dillard v. Alvarado (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1986)
- Golomb v. Board of Education of City School District (New York Supreme Court 1980)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
We note that respondents do not here assert "an unfettered right to terminate the employment of a teacher during his probationary period, unless the teacher establishes that the [chancellor] terminated for a constitutionally impermissible purpose or in violation of statutory proscription” (James v Board of Rduc., 37 NY2d 891, 892). In this circumstance the proper standard for judicial review of the action of the Chancellor of Schools of the New York City School District in terminating appellant’s appointment as a probationary teacher, because she had no right to continued appointment, is whether his action was arbitrary and capricious rather than whether it is supported by substantial evidence in the record. (Contrast subd 3 with subd 4 of CPLR 7803; see 8 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac, pars 7803.04, 7803.07, 7803.11-7803.13.)
We note that the by-laws of the board of education provide for a hearing at which the probationary teacher is entitled to
In the present case, inasmuch as appellant’s principal recommended that her services be discontinued and the district superintendent concurred in that recommendation, it cannot be said that the chancellor’s action was arbitrary and capricious.
Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in memorandum.
Order affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.