Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
14 New York opinions name it 4 courts 1943–2026 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Siegel v. Snydergreen2 sentences2026In light of this determination, we need not consider plaintiff's alternative arguments that the reports fell within the narrow party-statement exception to the Education Law privilege ( see Siegel v Snyder , 202 AD3d 125, 127 [2d Dept 2021]; Nowelle B. v Hamilton Med., Inc. , 174 AD3d 1345, 1347 [4th Dept 2019]), and that public policy disfavors applying PSQIA and/or Education Law § 6527 (3) to healthcare whistleblower actions. 2026In light of this determination, we need not consider plaintiff's alternative arguments that the reports fell within the narrow party-statement exception to the Education Law privilege ( see Siegel v Snyder , 202 AD3d 125, 127 [2d Dept 2021]; Nowelle B. v Hamilton Med., Inc. , 174 AD3d 1345, 1347 [4th Dept 2019]), and that public policy disfavors applying PSQIA and/or Education Law § 6527 (3) to healthcare whistleblower actions. | 1 | 1 |
Bluth v. Albany Medical Centergreen2 sentences2017Ctr., 132 AD3d 1131, 1132 [2015]; Fernekes v Catskill Regional Med. 2017Ctr., 132 AD3d 1131, 1132 [2015]; Fernekes v Catskill Regional Med. | 1 | 1 |
Bush v. Dolangreen2 sentences2010“In order to assert the privilege, ‘[a] hospital is required, at a minimum, to show that it has a review procedure and that the information for which the exemption is claimed was obtained or maintained in accordance with that review procedure’ ” (id. at 599, quoting Bush v Dolan, 149 AD2d 799, 800-801 [1989]). 2010“In order to assert the privilege, ‘[a] hospital is required, at a minimum, to show that it has a review procedure and that the information for which the exemption is claimed was obtained or maintained in accordance with that review procedure’ ” (id. at 599, quoting Bush v Dolan, 149 AD2d 799, 800-801 [1989]). | 1 | 1 |
Kivlehan v. Waltnergreen2 sentences2010The party asserting the Education Law privilege bears the burden of establishing its applicability (see Kivlehan v Waltner, 36 AD3d 597, 598 [2007]). 2010The party asserting the Education Law privilege bears the burden of establishing its applicability (see Kivlehan v Waltner, 36 AD3d 597, 598 [2007]). | 1 | 1 |
People ex rel. Diffenbach v. Regents of the University of New Yorkgreen1 sentence1996Diffenbach v Regents of Univ. of State of N. Y., supra, at 60-61 [emphasis supplied].) The court concludes that there is nothing contained in the Education Law to bar the filing of a petition by a private individual in a proceeding brought pursuant to Education Law § 226 (4). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In re Kilroy
green
1 sentence1987The Education Law provides that instruction given in a private school or at home must be "substantially equivalent" to that given in the public school of the city or district where the student resides ( id., § 3204[2]). * Under Department of Education Guidelines, the public school board of education, through the superintendent of schools of the district in which the child resides, is responsible for ascertaining whether the child is receiving instruction substantially equivalent in time and quality to that provided in the public school ( Matter of Kilroy v Fickstein, 121 Misc.2d 98 , 100-101 [ | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Gerber v. New York City Housing Authority
green
2 sentences1987Auth., 42 NY2d 162 ). 1987Auth., 42 NY2d 162 ). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Johnson v. Board of Trustees of the Middle Island Public Library
green
2 sentences1987Since the petitioner sought and obtained an adjournment of the Education Law hearing and was fully responsible for any delays occasioned thereby, he is not, therefore, entitled to salary benefits for that period (see, Matter of Johnson v Board of Trustees, 61 NY2d 1014 ; Gerber v New York City Hous. 1987Since the petitioner sought and obtained an adjournment of the Education Law hearing and was fully responsible for any delays occasioned thereby, he is not, therefore, entitled to salary benefits for that period (see, Matter of Johnson v Board of Trustees, 61 NY2d 1014 ; Gerber v New York City Hous. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Public Improvements, Inc. v. Board of Education
neutral
1 sentence1981Concur — Ross, J.P., Carro, Lupiano, Silverman and Bloom, JJ. [ 103 Misc 2d 713 .] | 1 | 1981–1981 |
People v. Medina
green
2 sentences1980So that the standard form contract which existed here, provided: "The contractor, however, shall not be barred from commencing an action for breach of contract under this provision provided that a detailed and verified statement of claim is served upon the contracting agency and the Comptroller not later than forty days after the mailing of such payment.” It is clear to this court that the defendant is estopped from invoking the provisions of section 3813 of the Education Law as a defense in this action in accordance with H & J Floor Covering ( 66 AD2d 588 , supra). 1980In summary, the court is of the opinion that the defendant is estopped from asserting section 3813 of the Education Law as a bar because: (1) the defendants by their course of conduct by previously failing to assert section 3813 of the Education Law as a bar to other proceedings, and by incorporating other notice provisions in their contracts have misled the plaintiff; (2) the injustice to the plaintiff which would result from permitting defendant to assert section 3813 of the Education Law as a bar, far outweighs the minor effects upon public interest or policy which may result from invoking | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Stewart v. Attorney Grievance Commission
green
1 sentence1979Although recognizing that this section is grounded in strong public policy considerations in that it safeguards tenured teachers from official or bureaucratic caprice by delineating a method whereby tenured teachers are to be removed, this court nevertheless concluded "that section 3020-a is not so sacrosanct as to be impervious to waiver." ( Id. , at p 455.) *498 While it is true that in Abramovich we were concerned with a waiver of statutory protections accorded a tenured teacher and not, as in this case, a waiver of a teacher's right to be appointed to a three-year probationary period in a | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Board of Education of Union Free School District No. 6 v. Board of Education of Union Free School District No. 7
neutral
1 sentence1968No. 7, supra; Gardner v. Ginther, 232 App. Div. 296 [4th Dept., 1931], affd. 257 N. Y. 578 ; Matter of Board of Educ. v. Wilson, 303 N. Y. 107 [1951]; Matter of Bd. of Educ. v. Allen, 6 A D 2d 316, affd. 6 N Y 2d 871, app. dsmd. 361 U. S. 535 [1960].) In view of the foregoing conclusions it is not necessary for this court to reach the question of whether section 3813 of the Education Law requires a claim of this nature to be first submitted to the Central School Board. | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Gardner v. Ginther
neutral
1 sentence1968No. 7, supra; Gardner v. Ginther, 232 App. Div. 296 [4th Dept., 1931], affd. 257 N. Y. 578 ; Matter of Board of Educ. v. Wilson, 303 N. Y. 107 [1951]; Matter of Bd. of Educ. v. Allen, 6 A D 2d 316, affd. 6 N Y 2d 871, app. dsmd. 361 U. S. 535 [1960].) In view of the foregoing conclusions it is not necessary for this court to reach the question of whether section 3813 of the Education Law requires a claim of this nature to be first submitted to the Central School Board. | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Siebel v. DEPARTMENT OF WELFARE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK
green
1 sentence1968No. 7, supra; Gardner v. Ginther, 232 App. Div. 296 [4th Dept., 1931], affd. 257 N. Y. 578 ; Matter of Board of Educ. v. Wilson, 303 N. Y. 107 [1951]; Matter of Bd. of Educ. v. Allen, 6 A D 2d 316, affd. 6 N Y 2d 871, app. dsmd. 361 U. S. 535 [1960].) In view of the foregoing conclusions it is not necessary for this court to reach the question of whether section 3813 of the Education Law requires a claim of this nature to be first submitted to the Central School Board. | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Gardner v. Ginther
neutral
1 sentence1968No. 7, supra; Gardner v. Ginther, 232 App. Div. 296 [4th Dept., 1931], affd. 257 N. Y. 578 ; Matter of Board of Educ. v. Wilson, 303 N. Y. 107 [1951]; Matter of Bd. of Educ. v. Allen, 6 A D 2d 316, affd. 6 N Y 2d 871, app. dsmd. 361 U. S. 535 [1960].) In view of the foregoing conclusions it is not necessary for this court to reach the question of whether section 3813 of the Education Law requires a claim of this nature to be first submitted to the Central School Board. | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Board of Education of Union Free School District No. 1 v. Wilson
neutral
1 sentence1968No. 7, supra; Gardner v. Ginther, 232 App. Div. 296 [4th Dept., 1931], affd. 257 N. Y. 578 ; Matter of Board of Educ. v. Wilson, 303 N. Y. 107 [1951]; Matter of Bd. of Educ. v. Allen, 6 A D 2d 316, affd. 6 N Y 2d 871, app. dsmd. 361 U. S. 535 [1960].) In view of the foregoing conclusions it is not necessary for this court to reach the question of whether section 3813 of the Education Law requires a claim of this nature to be first submitted to the Central School Board. | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Engel v. Vitale
green
1 sentence1967Section 310 of the Education Law does not bar this procedure since the application herein involves questions concerning the performance of a constitutional duty (Matter of Scales v. Board of Educ., 41 Misc 2d 391 ; Matter of Engel v. Vitale, 18 Misc 2d 659 , affd. 11 A D 2d 340, affd. 10 N Y 2d 174, revd. on other grounds 370 U. S. 421 ). | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Scales v. Board of Education
green
1 sentence1967Section 310 of the Education Law does not bar this procedure since the application herein involves questions concerning the performance of a constitutional duty (Matter of Scales v. Board of Educ., 41 Misc 2d 391 ; Matter of Engel v. Vitale, 18 Misc 2d 659 , affd. 11 A D 2d 340, affd. 10 N Y 2d 174, revd. on other grounds 370 U. S. 421 ). | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Engel v. Vitale
green
1 sentence1967Section 310 of the Education Law does not bar this procedure since the application herein involves questions concerning the performance of a constitutional duty (Matter of Scales v. Board of Educ., 41 Misc 2d 391 ; Matter of Engel v. Vitale, 18 Misc 2d 659 , affd. 11 A D 2d 340, affd. 10 N Y 2d 174, revd. on other grounds 370 U. S. 421 ). | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Fabricius v. Graves
neutral
1 sentence1956While section 310 of the Education Law gives the commissioner the power to determine disputes concerning all matters under the Education Law and expressly states that his determination in such matters shall not be subject to “ question or review in any place or court whatever ’ ’, the courts have not held that this prevents a judicial review of an arbitrary or unlawful act on his part (Matter of Fabricius v. Graves, 254 App. Div. 19 ; Matter of Beam v. Wilson, 279 App. Div. 277 ). | 1 | 1956–1956 |
Beam v. Wilson
neutral
1 sentence1956While section 310 of the Education Law gives the commissioner the power to determine disputes concerning all matters under the Education Law and expressly states that his determination in such matters shall not be subject to “ question or review in any place or court whatever ’ ’, the courts have not held that this prevents a judicial review of an arbitrary or unlawful act on his part (Matter of Fabricius v. Graves, 254 App. Div. 19 ; Matter of Beam v. Wilson, 279 App. Div. 277 ). | 1 | 1956–1956 |
Hanley v. O'Connell
neutral
1 sentence1946In denying the application the court handed down this brief memorandum: “ All questions as to the applicability of 491 of the Education Law as a defense must be determined upon the new trial. ” ( 270 App. Div. 800 .) Thereby, the court clearly indicated that the original opinion was in no way to be interpreted as a finding that section 491 of the Education Law was or was not applicable. | 1 | 1946–1946 |
Matter of Frankle v. Board of Educ., City of New York
neutral
1 sentence1943(Matter of Frankle v. Board of Education of City of N. Y., 173 Misc. 1050 , mod. 259 App. Div. 1006 , affd. as mod. 285 N. Y. 541 ; Matter of Sokolove v. Board of Education, N. Y. | 1 | 1943–1943 |
Seventy Nine Delancey Corp. v. Meridan Holding Corp.
neutral
1 sentence1943(Matter of Frankle v. Board of Education of City of N. Y., 173 Misc. 1050 , mod. 259 App. Div. 1006 , affd. as mod. 285 N. Y. 541 ; Matter of Sokolove v. Board of Education, N. Y. | 1 | 1943–1943 |
Frankle v. Board of Education
neutral
1 sentence1943(Matter of Frankle v. Board of Education of City of N. Y., 173 Misc. 1050 , mod. 259 App. Div. 1006 , affd. as mod. 285 N. Y. 541 ; Matter of Sokolove v. Board of Education, N. Y. | 1 | 1943–1943 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.