New York Consolidated Laws
N.Y. Education Law § 3028 (2026)
Liability of school district for cost and attorney's fees of action against, or prosecutions of, teachers, members of supervisory and adm...
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NY-LEGnysenate.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
§ 3028. Liability of school district for cost and attorney's fees of action against, or prosecutions of, teachers, members of supervisory and administrative staff or employees, and school volunteers. Notwithstanding any inconsistent provision of any general, special or local law, or the limitations contained in the provisions of any city charter, each board of education, trustee or trustees in the state shall provide an attorney or attorneys for, and pay such attorney's fees and expenses necessarily incurred in the defense of a teacher, member of a supervisory or administrative staff or employee, or authorized participant in a school volunteer program in any civil or ciminal action or proceeding arising out of disciplinary action taken against any pupil of the district while in the discharge of his duties within the scope of his employment or authorized volunteer duties. For such purposes the board of education, trustee or trustees may arrange for and maintain appropriate insurance with any insurance company created by or under the laws of this state, or in any insurance company authorized by law to transact business in this state, or such board, trustee or trustees may elect to act as self-insurers to maintain the aforesaid protection. A board of education, trustee or board of trustees, however, shall not be subject to the duty imposed by this section, unless such teacher, or member of the supervisory and administrative staff or employee or authorized participant in a school volunteer program shall, within ten days of the time he is served with any summons, complaint, process, notice, demand or pleading, deliver the original or a copy of the same to such board of education, trustee or board of trustees.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1977–2021 · leading case: Matter of Lemma v. Nassau Cnty. Police Officer Indem. Bd., 105 N.E.3d 1250 (N.Y. 2018).
Matter of Lemma v. Nassau Cnty. Police Officer Indem. Bd., 105 N.E.3d 1250 (N.Y. 2018). “employment" ( see Education Law § 3028). To support the denial of indemnification, the City pointed to General Municipal Law § 50-k (2), a later-enacted statute entitling city employees to indemnification only for conduct that does not violate a rule or regulation of their…”
Inglis v. Dundee Cent. Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ., 180 Misc. 2d 156 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1999). “The petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding asserting that pursuant to Education Law § 3028 the respondent School District should reimburse her for legal fees incurred in defending herself in Dundee Village Court on a charge of harassment in the second degree, in…”
Bellnier v. Lund, 438 F. Supp. 47 (N.D.N.Y. 1977). “Perhaps the most telling factor, especially with respect to this case, is Education Law § 3028, which requires that a board of education indemnify a teacher for all costs and attorneys’ fees resulting from an action, civil or criminal, growing out of an attempt to discipline a…”
Zehner v. Jordan-Elbridge Bd. of Educ., 666 F. App'x 29 (2d Cir. 2016). “” N.Y. Educ. Law § 3028 -d (Mckinney 2006).”
Thomas v. New York City Dep't of Educ., 33 Misc. 3d 629 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2011). “The parties’ disagreement focuses on the both aforecited sections of law as well as Education Law § 3028. The parties also disagree about whether certain trial court decisions apply (as petitioner claims) or have been incorrectly decided (as respondents contend).”
Herbert v. City of New York, 748 F. Supp. 2d 225 (S.D.N.Y. 2010). “Civil Service Law § 75 -b and N.Y. Education Law § 3028 -d. Defendants have moved for summary judgment on all of Herbert’s remaining claims, arguing that she was demoted because of poor performance, and contending — as to the retaliation claim' — 'that there is no evidence that…”
Casey v. Tieman, 110 A.D.2d 167 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985). “§ 3023), and to “provide an attorney or attorneys for, and pay such attorney’s fees and expenses necessarily incurred in the defense of a teacher *** in any civil or criminal action or *172 proceeding arising out of [any] disciplinary action taken against any pupil of the…”
Sagal-Cotler v. Bd. of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist., 988 N.E.2d 502 (N.Y. 2013). “Petitioners’ claim that they are entitled to a defense rests upon Education Law § 3028, which says: “Notwithstanding any inconsistent provision of any general, special or local law, or the limitations *675 contained in the provisions of any city charter, each board of education,…”
Timmerman v. Bd. of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist., 50 A.D.3d 592 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep't 2008). “In denying petitioner’s request to be reimbursed for attorneys’ fees and expenses, respondents merely said that his “criminal proceeding does not fall within the scope of Education Law § 3028.” At the agency level—as opposed to their response to the petition—respondents made no…”
Dayes v. Watertown City Sch. Dist., No. 5:20-cv-00964 (N.D.N.Y. Sept. 27, 2021). “” N.Y. Educ. Law § 3028 . Here, because there are no allegations by Dayes concerning “disciplinary action taken” against Z.”
Thomas v. New York City Dep't of Educ., 96 A.D.3d 401 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep't 2012). “The court correctly determined that Education Law § 2560, which incorporates by reference General Municipal Law § 50-k, and Education Law § 3028, do not conflict and should be read together and “applied harmoniously and consistently” (Alweis v Evans, 69 NY2d 199, 204 [1987]).”
Sagal-Cotler v. Bd. of Educ., 96 A.D.3d 409 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep't 2012). “Contrary to Supreme Court’s determination and the dissent’s position, Education Law § 2560, which incorporates by reference General Municipal Law § 50-k, and Education Law § 3028 are not irreconcilable, but rather can and should be read together and “applied harmoniously and…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.