Opinion
6818 Index 654780/16
06-07-2018
In re Marla EILENBERG, Petitioner–Appellant, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Respondents–Respondents.
Glass Krakower LLP, New York (Bryan D. Glass of counsel), for appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Janet L. Zaleon of counsel), for respondents.
Glass Krakower LLP, New York (Bryan D. Glass of counsel), for appellant.
Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Janet L. Zaleon of counsel), for respondents.
Renwick, J.P., Richter, Webber, Kern, Moulton, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol R. Edmead, J.), entered January 20, 2017, which granted respondents' cross motion to dismiss the petition challenging respondents' determination, which, after a hearing, sustained numerous specifications against petitioner and terminated her position as a guidance counselor, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Petitioner abandons any challenge to the court's determination that the petition was not timely served, and that she had shown no cause to extend the time for service pursuant to CPLR 306–b (see Henneberry v. Borstein, 91 A.D.3d 493, 937 N.Y.S.2d 177 [1st Dept. 2012] ).
In any event, even assuming that the petition was timely served, the penalty of termination does not shock our sense of fairness. The record establishes petitioner's consecutive years of incompetent performance and resistance to remedial assistance (see e.g. Matter of March v. New York City Bd./Dept. of Educ., 157 A.D.3d 555, 69 N.Y.S.3d 49 [1st Dept. 2018] ). There exists no basis to disturb the Hearing Officer's credibility determinations (see Matter of Douglas v. New York City Bd./Dept. of Educ., 87 A.D.3d 856, 857, 929 N.Y.S.2d 127 [1st Dept. 2011] ).
We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.