Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

In the Matter of Anthony J. RUSSO, Respondent, v. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, Appellant.

Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York City (Kathy Chang Park and Richard Dearing of counsel), for appellant.

Anthony J. Russo, respondent pro se.

Opinion

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules, order insofar as appealed from reversed, with costs, New York City Department of Education's cross motion to dismiss the petition granted in its entirety, and certified question answered in the negative. We cannot say that “the penalty of [termination] ... shocks the judicial conscience” (Matter of Kelly v. Safir, 96 N.Y.2d 32, 40, 724 N.Y.S.2d 680, 747 N.E.2d 1280 [2001] ; see Matter of Pell v. Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 N.Y.2d 222, 234–235, 356 N.Y.S.2d 833, 313 N.E.2d 321 [1974] ).

Chief Judge LIPPMAN and Judges READ, PIGOTT, RIVERA, ABDUS–SALAAM, STEIN and FAHEY concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Russo v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ.
(Apr 7, 2015)