Court Opinion

ID: 5487892
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-10 02:19:19.366653+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:33:42.899603
License: Public Domain

OPINION OF THE COURT
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, and certified question answered in the affirmative. The Appellate Division correctly determined that the penalty of termination imposed on petitioner was excessive in light of all the circumstances (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 NY2d 222, 233 [1974]).
Concur: Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Cipakick, Graffeo, Read and Pigott. Judge Smith dissents and votes to reverse for the reason that it cannot be concluded, as a matter of law, that the penalty of termination shocks the judicial conscience (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 NY2d 222, 233 [1974]).