W.B. v Baldwinsville Cent. School Dist.
Annotate this CaseDecided on August 15, 2005
Supreme Court, Onondaga County
W.B., Petitioner,
against
Baldwinsville Central School District, Respondent.
05-3927
W.B., PRO SE
Baldwinsville, NY 13027
SUSAN T. JOHNS, ESQ.
FERRARA, FIORENZA, LARRISON,
BARRETT & REITZ, P.C.
Attorneys for Respondent
5010 Campuswood Drive
East Syracuse, NY 13057
John V. Centra, J.
On May 26, 2005, A.B., Petitioner's son, was suspended from the Baldwinsville school district for alleged sexual harassment of a female student. The Superintendent's hearing was scheduled for June 29, 2005. In his petition, petitioner alleges that the attorney who was to be representing petitioner at the Superintendent's hearing was required to appear before the Cortland County Family Court on that day in two separate neglect proceedings. Petitioner's attorney attempted to adjourn the superintendent's hearing by contacting the school district's attorney who indicated he had no problem with the adjournment. As a follow-up, on June 28, 2005, an Affirmation of Prior Engagement was faxed to the hearing officer and the school's attorney. Despite his request for an adjournment, the Superintendent's hearing went forward in the absence of petitioner, his son, and his attorney on June 29, 2005. As a [*2]result of this hearing, A.B. was suspended from school for the entire 2006 school year. Because of the suspension, A.B. has been unable to attend summer school for math which he requires. As such, petitioner contends, A.B. is not being provided with alternative instruction in accordance with New York State Education Law.
Petitioner argues that the expulsion occurred without the opportunity to present evidence, witnesses or cross-examine witnesses. Pursuant to Education Law 3214 (3), petitioner has the right to appeal the decision to the Board of Education "which shall make a decision, based solely upon the record in this proceeding". Since the record does not contain testimony on Petitioner's behalf, petitioner posits that the Board of Education will not have before it all of the evidence necessary to make a fair and impartial decision.
Petitioner seeks an order requiring respondent to immediately provide his son alternative instruction in math in a summer school setting and reverse its decision for the year-long suspension until such time as a Superintendent's hearing can be held with the opportunity to present witnesses and cross-examine witnesses.
The court finds that the determination is not final and can be adequately reviewed by some other body or officer. Petitioner has requested a review of the decision by the Board of Education. If petitioner is not satisfied with that result, he can appeal directly to the Commissioner of Education. Petitioner is required to exhaust the administrative remedies available under the Education Law prior to commencing a proceeding in this court. Langton v. Iroquois Cent. Sch. Dist., 291 AD2d 845 (4th Dep't 2002).
Further, Petitioner's claim for alternative instruction during the suspension is without merit. A.B. is 17 years old and beyond compulsory school age. Thus, there is no legal obligation to continue to provide for his education. Reid v. Nyquist, 65 Misc 2d 718, 719-20 (S.Ct. Albany Co. 1971).
The petition is dismissed. Respondent is to submit an Order on notice.
JOHN V. CENTRA
Supreme Court Justice
[*3]
Dated: August 15, 2005
Syracuse, New York
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
