From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Hall v. Johnstone

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 16, 1994
209 A.D.2d 982 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

November 16, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Stander, J.

Present — Denman, P.J., Green, Balio, Wesley and Callahan, JJ.


Judgment unanimously reversed on the law without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: Petitioner was informed by the chairperson of the Nursing Department at SUNY Brockport that, because of his conduct during a clinical assignment at a local hospital, he was being given a failing grade in the clinical course and was being dropped from the nursing program. Pursuant to guidelines set forth in the college catalog, petitioner instituted a student grade appeal. A faculty panel convened a hearing and determined that no basis existed to overturn the failing grade. Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge that determination, contending that the appeal and hearing procedure violated his right to due process. Supreme Court annulled the determination and directed that respondents schedule a rehearing in accordance with certain procedural protections. We reverse.

The college guidelines authorize an appeal from the determination of the faculty panel to the vice-president for academic affairs in any case where there "is clear evidence of substantial irregularity on the part of the panel." The record fails to establish that petitioner exhausted his administrative remedies by appealing the alleged denial of due process rights to the vice-president for academic affairs (see, Matter of Nelson v Coughlin, 188 A.D.2d 1071, appeal dismissed 81 N.Y.2d 834). Because respondents did not assert in their answer the failure to exhaust administrative remedies as an objection in point of law (see, Alexander, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C7804:7, at 657), respondents waived that objection.

In any event, petitioner's due process challenge lacks merit. Petitioner attended the hearing and had the opportunity to present his case to the panel. He was assisted at the hearing by his mother, who made a general statement to the panel. He was not denied the opportunity to call witnesses or to present documentary evidence in support of his case. Petitioner admitted at the hearing that he fell asleep during his clinical assignment, leaving a hospital patient unattended. He also admitted that, by reason of such conduct, he could be assigned a failing grade and be removed from the nursing program. The panel concluded that the medical condition of petitioner while attending his clinical assignment did not excuse his failure to notify his supervisors that he was leaving a patient unattended. Under the circumstances, the appeal and hearing process satisfied the minimal due process rights applicable to academic grade determinations (see, Board of Curators, Univ. of Mo. v Horowitz, 435 U.S. 78; Matter of Sofair v. State Univ., 44 N.Y.2d 475). Further, the court erred in concluding that petitioner had the right to cross-examine witnesses and in directing that the rehearing be transcribed (see, Board of Curators, Univ. of Mo. v Horowitz, supra; Matter of Mary M. v. Clark, 100 A.D.2d 41, 44).


Summaries of

Matter of Hall v. Johnstone

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 16, 1994
209 A.D.2d 982 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Matter of Hall v. Johnstone

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JOHN HALL, Respondent, v. D. BRUCE JOHNSTONE, as…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Nov 16, 1994

Citations

209 A.D.2d 982 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
620 N.Y.S.2d 630

Citing Cases

Sanduby v. City Univ. of N.Y.

Academic grade determinations need only provide students with “minimal due process rights.” Hall v. …

Medina v. Arizona Dept. of Transp

Id. Once Medina sought judicial review of his license suspension, his alleged failure to exhaust…