With respect to the manner in which discipline was imposed upon their daughter, petitioners claim several procedural errors occurred. First, they contend that their daughter was not provided an opportunity to call her mother prior to respondent Keany's investigation of the incident. There is no legal requirement that a parent be contacted or present during an administrative investigation of an incident involving student conduct. Education Law 3214 requires only that, for suspensions of five days or less, parents be provided an opportunity for an informal conference with the principal. The record indicates that petitioners were afford such an opportunity.
Petitioners have the burden of establishing an entitlement to the relief sought.
Thus, petitioners provide no legal basis in support of their claim that their daughter was denied any legal right during the investigation of the incident. Petitioners argue that respondents did not afford their daughter due process because petitioners were not permitted to question students involved in the incident. Petitioners allege that respondent Keany's failure to permit them to question the students constitutes a violation of due process that warrants reversal of the disciplinary action. In this case, the incident leading to the student's suspension was investigated at the school district level, as a result of information received from staff at the school in Quebec. Respondent Keany interviewed petitioner's daughter and, based upon that interview imposed the five-day suspension.