Legal Opinion
Kahn v. Department of Education
New York Court of Appeals
Decided February 14, 2012No. 25, 26PublishedCited by 40 opinions
POINTS OF COUNSEL
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Read, J.
These cases call upon us to decide whether petitioners Leslie Kahn and Doreen Nash (collectively, petitioners) were required to exhaust an available internal appeal procedure before challenging the termination of their probationary employment at the City of New York’s Department of Education (the Department or DOE). The Department is obligated by its collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with the United Federation of Teachers and its own bylaws to afford probationary employees the opportunity for reconsideration of a decision to discontinue their employment.
We hold…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- De Milio v. BorghardNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- Frasier v. Board of EducationNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
- Kahn v. New York City Department of EducationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Tucker v. Board of EducationNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
- Schulman v. Board of EducationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Storman v. New York City Department of EducationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Brown v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Sheil v. MelucciAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Riverso v. New York State Department of Environmental ConservationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Matter of Kaneev v. City of New York Envtl. Control Bd.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.