Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Bryant

Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

June 13, 2013

In the Matter of THEODORA Q. BRYANT et al., Respondents,
v.
BOARD OF EDUCATION, CHENANGO FORKS CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellant.

Calendar Date: February 5, 2013

Peters, P.J., vouched in.Coughlin & Gerhart, LLP, Binghamton (Lars P. Mead of counsel), for appellant.

Richard E. Casagrande, New York State United Teachers, Latham (James D. Bilik of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Mercure, Rose, Lahtinen and Garry, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Lahtinen, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Rumsey, J.), entered September 3, 2010 in Broome County, which granted petitioners' application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to annul a determination of respondent terminating reimbursement of certain Medicare premiums.

The underlying facts are set forth in our prior decision (21 A.D.3d 1134 [2005]) and in the companion case brought by the Chenango Forks Central School District (Matter of Chenango Forks Cent. School Dist. v New York State Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 95 A.D.3d 1479 [2012], affd ___ N.Y.3d ___, 2013 NY Slip Op 04039 [2013]). In the companion case, the Public Employment Relations Board (hereinafter PERB) ordered the School District to rescind its June 2003 memorandum in which it notified employees and retirees that it was terminating its practice of reimbursing Medicare Part B premiums. The result of the companion case is that the School District must reinstate its former practice of reimbursing retirees for Medicare Part B premiums, which is the same relief sought in the current proceeding. PERB's order in the companion case has been upheld by the Court of Appeals. Petitioners here have thus received — via that holding — the full relief challenged by respondent in the current appeal. Accordingly, this appeal is now moot. The exception to the mootness doctrine does not apply in that, although the issue advanced herein may recur and is significant, it is not likely to evade review (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 N.Y.2d 707, 714-715 [1980]).

Peters, P.J., Rose and Garry, JJ., concur;

Mercure, J., not taking part.

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.