From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Morley v. Arricale

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Oct 10, 1985
66 N.Y.2d 665 (N.Y. 1985)

Opinion

Argued September 6, 1985

Decided October 10, 1985

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, Alfred M. Ascione, J.

Thomas M. Kennedy and Ira Cure for appellant.

Frederick A.O. Schwarz, Jr., Corporation Counsel ( Helen P. Brown and June A. Witterschein of counsel), for respondents.


MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Appellate Division that determinations as to the qualifications of candidates for pedagogical positions are within the purview of the Board of Education ( see, Matter of Council of Supervisory Assns. v Board of Educ., 56 Misc.2d 32, 37-38, affd 31 A.D.2d 34, revd on other grounds 23 N.Y.2d 458). Absent a showing that the Board acted arbitrarily or capriciously, the court may not substitute its own judgment for the Board's on matters entrusted by law to the Board's own specialized knowledge and judgment ( Matter of Antell v Board of Educ., 21 Misc.2d 119, 125, affd 10 A.D.2d 699).

Petitioner has not made any showing that the Board action was arbitrary or capricious. Petitioner failed to produce the requisite "contemporaneous documentation" to validate his administrative assistant time as supervisory experience. The Board therefore found that petitioner lacked the requisite two years of supervisory experience, and therefore acted in compliance with applicable Chancellor's Regulation C-261 and regulatory Special Circular 30-R. There is a reasonable basis for requiring the supervisory documentation be contemporaneous, in that the review process is made more objective and fair. Further, the competitive selection procedure leading to assignment or appointment of a principal under Special Circular 30-R cannot be subverted without violating N Y Constitution, article V, § 6.

Estoppel is not available against a local government unit for the purpose of ratifying an administrative error (the actions of the Community School Board and its Superintendent in appointing petitioner as principal) made without compliance with formally adopted selection standards and procedures ( see, Matter of Bloomberg-Dubin v Board of Educ., 82 A.D.2d 854, 856, affd 56 N.Y.2d 555).

Chief Judge WACHTLER and Judges JASEN, MEYER, SIMONS, KAYE, ALEXANDER and TITONE concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.


Summaries of

Morley v. Arricale

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Oct 10, 1985
66 N.Y.2d 665 (N.Y. 1985)
Case details for

Morley v. Arricale

Case Details

Full title:IRA MORLEY, Appellant, v. FRANK C. ARRICALE, II, as Community…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Oct 10, 1985

Citations

66 N.Y.2d 665 (N.Y. 1985)
495 N.Y.S.2d 966
486 N.E.2d 824

Citing Cases

In re City of N.Y. Rel, to Acqu. Title

It must also be recognized that estoppel is not generally available against a government entity in the…

In re Application of N.Y.

In this regard, it has been held that estoppel "'is not available against a local government unit for the…