Case Name: TANYA TIBBS, INFANT, BY HER GUARDIANS, MR. & MRS. HAROLD DIGGS; NELLIE HARRELL, INFANT, BY HER GUARDIANS, MR. AND MRS. SAMUEL SPURGEON; GENSEY LAWRENCE, INFANT, BY HER GUARDIANS, MR. & MRS. NORRIS LAWRENCE; DENISE AVERETTE, INFANT, BY HER GUARDIANS, MR. & MRS. WILLIE AVERETTE, AND OTHERS SIMILARLY AFFECTED, APPELLANTS, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF FRANKLIN (SOMERSET COUNTY), RESPONDENT
Court: New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1971-03-30
Citations: 114 N.J. Super. 287
Docket Number: 
Parties: TANYA TIBBS, INFANT, BY HER GUARDIANS, MR. & MRS. HAROLD DIGGS; NELLIE HARRELL, INFANT, BY HER GUARDIANS, MR. AND MRS. SAMUEL SPURGEON; GENSEY LAWRENCE, INFANT, BY HER GUARDIANS, MR. & MRS. NORRIS LAWRENCE; DENISE AVERETTE, INFANT, BY HER GUARDIANS, MR. & MRS. WILLIE AVERETTE, AND OTHERS SIMILARLY AFFECTED, APPELLANTS, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF FRANKLIN (SOMERSET COUNTY), RESPONDENT.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Superior Court Reports
Volume: 114
Pages: 287–306

Head Matter:
TANYA TIBBS, INFANT, BY HER GUARDIANS, MR. & MRS. HAROLD DIGGS; NELLIE HARRELL, INFANT, BY HER GUARDIANS, MR. AND MRS. SAMUEL SPURGEON; GENSEY LAWRENCE, INFANT, BY HER GUARDIANS, MR. & MRS. NORRIS LAWRENCE; DENISE AVERETTE, INFANT, BY HER GUARDIANS, MR. & MRS. WILLIE AVERETTE, AND OTHERS SIMILARLY AFFECTED, APPELLANTS, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF FRANKLIN (SOMERSET COUNTY), RESPONDENT.
Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division
Argued February 16, 1971
Decided March 30, 1971.
Before Judges Coneokd, Kolovsky and Carton.
Mr. James B. Ventanlonio (Director, Somerset County Legal Services) argued the cause for appellants (Messrs. Michael D. Lang and William J. Zaino on the brief).
Mr. Leonard N. Arnold argued the cause for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiak.
The expulsions of appellants are reversed and set aside for failure to produce the accusing witnesses for testimony and cross-examination.
The matters are remanded to the Commissioner of Education for rehearing de novo of the charges on which appellants were expelled should the local school authorities choose to prosecute them. No costs.