Case Name: In the Matter of Esther Linfield, Appellant, v. Ewald B. Nyquist, as Commissioner of Education of the State of New York, Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1980-01-10
Citations: 48 N.Y.2d 1005
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of Esther Linfield, Appellant, v Ewald B. Nyquist, as Commissioner of Education of the State of New York, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 48
Pages: 1005–1007

Head Matter:
In the Matter of Esther Linfield, Appellant, v Ewald B. Nyquist, as Commissioner of Education of the State of New York, Respondent.
Argued December 13, 1979;
decided January 10, 1980
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Murray A. Gordon and Joan Stern Kiok for appellant.
James H. Whitney, Robert D. Stone, Jean M. Coon and John T. Feck for respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
Petitioner's sole contention on this appeal is that the pen alty of dismissal from her position as a tenured high school teacher is excessive. However, in light of the affirmed findings of incompetent and inefficient service in this case, we cannot say, as a matter of law, that the sanction of dismissal was inappropriate. (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222.)
We recognize that, in consequence of the by-law provision cited by the dissenter, the action of the board of education will work a dismissal of appellant from the entire New York City public school system. Nonetheless, although in one view this result may appear harsh, to decline to uphold the determination would be to force the board of education to continue to employ a teacher who has been found, after a hearing, to be incompetent.