Last v Syosset Cent. School Dist.

[*1] Last v Syosset Cent. School Dist. 2007 NY Slip Op 51218(U) [16 Misc 3d 126(A)] Decided on June 15, 2007 Appellate Term, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on June 15, 2007
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : RUDOLPH, P.J., McCABE and TANENBAUM, JJ
2006-401 N C.

Cynthia Last, Respondent,

against

Syosset Central School District, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Nassau County, Third District (Bonnie P. Chaiken, J.), entered November 22, 2005. The judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded plaintiff the sum of $3,969.77.

Judgment reversed without costs and action dismissed.

Substantial justice was not done between the parties in accordance with the rules and principles of substantive law (UDCA 1804, 1807) in this small claims action seeking to recover for breach of a teaching contract. At trial, plaintiff testified that the principal of the Syosset Summer School program had sent her a letter indicating that she had been hired and that she reasonably relied, to her detriment, upon such representation in giving up a summer position with the Great Neck School District.
However, all final hiring decisions (with exceptions not applicable here) are required to be made by the Board of Education, not a principal (see Education Law § 3012). Because plaintiff knew that names of teachers for the summer school had to be submitted to the Board of Education for final approval, her reliance on the alleged apparent authority of the principal of the Syosset Summer School program to finalize the hiring arrangement was not reasonable (see Hallock v State of New York, 64 NY2d 224, 231 [1984]).

Finally, the court below properly exercised jurisdiction in this matter, which does not require knowledge and understanding of operational procedures or other specialized practices within the purview of an administrative agency, but requires only the resolution of issues within [*2]the normal province of the courts (see Weingarten v Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Teachers' Retirement Sys., 98 NY2d 575, 579-580 [2002]).

Rudolph, P.J., McCabe and Tanenbaum, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: June 15, 2007