From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Martin v. Ambach

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 6, 1986
494 N.E.2d 96 (N.Y. 1986)

Opinion

Argued March 18, 1986

Decided May 6, 1986

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department, Lawrence E. Kahn, J.

Kenneth Pawson, James H. Whitney and Robert D. Stone for appellant.

Kevin H. Harren, Rocco A. Solimando and Bernard F. Ashe for Andrew Martin, respondent.

Frederick A.O. Schwarz, Jr., Corporation Counsel (Fay Leoussis of counsel), for Community School Board No. 8 of the City of New York, respondent.



MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be modified, by vacating its reinstatement of the hearing panel's original findings and recommendations as to charge number three and remitting the matter to the Commissioner for further proceedings in accordance with this memorandum and, as so modified, affirmed, with costs to petitioner Martin against the Commissioner.

Preponderance of the evidence, and not substantial evidence, is the proper standard of proof to be applied by a hearing panel in determining whether disciplinary charges brought pursuant to Education Law § 3020-a have been established. Indeed, as noted by the Appellate Division, this is the accepted standard of proof at the hearing level in such proceedings (see, e.g., Matter of Strongin v Nyquist, 44 N.Y.2d 943, 945, appeal dismissed 440 U.S. 901). Because the Commissioner has never reviewed the panel's original findings and recommendations of July 16, 1979, that charge number three was not established by a preponderance of the evidence, the matter should be remitted for the Commissioner's exercise of his powers of review under Education Law §§ 310 and 3020-a (5). We have considered the Commissioner's remaining contention and find it to be without merit.

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

Order modified and matter remitted to Supreme Court, Albany County, with directions to remand to the Commissioner for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum herein and, as so modified, affirmed, with costs to petitioner against the Commissioner.


Summaries of

Matter of Martin v. Ambach

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 6, 1986
494 N.E.2d 96 (N.Y. 1986)
Case details for

Matter of Martin v. Ambach

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ANDREW MARTIN, Respondent, v. GORDON M. AMBACH, as…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: May 6, 1986

Citations

494 N.E.2d 96 (N.Y. 1986)
494 N.E.2d 96
502 N.Y.S.2d 991

Citing Cases

Douglas v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ.

In such proceedings, the district must allege that a teacher improvement plan (“TIP”) was “developed and…

Young v. Central Square Cent. School Dist.

The District had the burden of proving this charge by a preponderance of the evidence. See Martin v. Ambach,…