Anderson v New York City Dept. of Educ.

Anderson v New York City Dept. of Educ. 2012 NY Slip Op 02056 Decided on March 20, 2012 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on March 20, 2012
Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Renwick, Richter, Abdus-Salaam, JJ.
7141 108913/09

[*1]William Anderson, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v

New York City Department of Education, Defendant-Respondent.




Willam Anderson, appellant pro se.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Suzanne
K. Colt of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Karen S. Smith, J.), entered April 29, 2010, which, in an action arising out of the termination of plaintiff's employment as a probationary teacher, granted defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The complaint was properly dismissed as barred by the doctrine of res judicata. Plaintiff's action arose out of the same set of circumstances as his prior article 78 proceeding, which was dismissed. "[O]nce a claim is brought to a final conclusion, all other claims arising out of the same transaction or series of transactions are barred, even if based upon
different theories or if seeking a different remedy" (O'Brien v City of Syracuse, 54 NY2d 353, 357 [1981]; see Daved Fire Sys. Inc. v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 46 AD3d 364 [2007]).

We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments, including that he did not have a full and fair opportunity to
litigate his claims, and find them unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: MARCH 20, 2012

CLERK