ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE [AI] IS NOT USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN PREPARING NYPPL SUMMARIES OF JUDICIAL AND QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS

October 11, 2011

Termination of an individual holding a public office “at-will”

Termination of an individual holding a public office “at-will”
Matter of Scro v Board of Education of Jordan-Elbridge Cent. School Dist., 2011 NY Slip Op 06738, Appellate Division, Fourth Department

Anthony Scro challenged his termination as the school district’s treasurer contending that such action violated his right to due process right. He obtained a court order from Supreme Court, Onondaga County annulling his termination and directing the school district to reinstate him to his former position.

The Appellate Division reversed the lower court “on the law” and dismissed Scro’s petition.

The court said that it agreed with the school district and the New York State School Boards Association, Inc.* that, under Education Law §2130(4), Scro was an at-will employee who was not entitled to pre-termination due process. 

The Appellate Division noted that although Education Law §2130(4) provides in relevant part that "[t]he board of education in every union free school district … shall appoint a district treasurer … who shall hold office during the pleasure of the board," it applies with equal force to central school districts such as the Jordan-Elbridge Central School District.

As Saco held office “during the pleasure of the board," the Board of Education had the right to discontinue his services at any time. Thus, said the Appellate Division, Saco “was the equivalent of an at-will employee” inasmuch as he served at the pleasure of' the Board of Education and was not entitled to “pre-termination due process.”

Focusing on another aspect of the case, the Appellate Division said that it agreed the school district that Saco, having failed to file his oath of office within 30 days of his being given notice of his appointment as required by Public Officers Law §30(1)(h), the office to which he had been appointed “automatically became vacant” and "no hearing on charges was required to dismiss him from office."**

Public Officers Law §30(1)(h), in pertinent part, provides that should an individual appointed to the position refuse or neglect to file his official oath or undertaking, within thirty days after notice of his or her appointment such “office shall be vacant … before the expiration of the term thereof….”

* New York State School Boards Association, Inc. filed an amicus curiae brief in support of the Jordan-Elbridge Cent. School District arguing that Scro served as an at-will employee and thus was not entitled to pre-termination hearing.
**  See, also, Informal Opinions of the Attorney General 84-17 in which the Attorney General indicated that in the event an oath of office required by law is not timely filed, the office “becomes vacant by operation of law.”

CAUTION

Subsequent court and administrative rulings, or changes to laws, rules and regulations may have modified or clarified or vacated or reversed the information and, or, decisions summarized in NYPPL. For example, New York State Department of Civil Service's Advisory Memorandum 24-08 reflects changes required as the result of certain amendments to §72 of the New York State Civil Service Law to take effect January 1, 2025 [See Chapter 306 of the Laws of 2024]. Advisory Memorandum 24-08 in PDF format is posted on the Internet at https://www.cs.ny.gov/ssd/pdf/AM24-08Combined.pdf. Accordingly, the information and case summaries should be Shepardized® or otherwise checked to make certain that the most recent information is being considered by the reader.
THE MATERIAL ON THIS WEBSITE IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY. AGAIN, CHANGES IN LAWS, RULES, REGULATIONS AND NEW COURT AND ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS MAY AFFECT THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS LAWBLOG. THE MATERIAL PRESENTED IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE AND THE USE OF ANY MATERIAL POSTED ON THIS WEBSITE, OR CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING SUCH MATERIAL, DOES NOT CREATE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP.
NYPPL Blogger Harvey Randall served as Principal Attorney, New York State Department of Civil Service; Director of Personnel, SUNY Central Administration; Director of Research, Governor’s Office of Employee Relations; and Staff Judge Advocate General, New York Guard. Consistent with the Declaration of Principles jointly adopted by a Committee of the American Bar Association and a Committee of Publishers and Associations, the material posted to this blog is presented with the understanding that neither the publisher nor NYPPL and, or, its staff and contributors are providing legal advice to the reader and in the event legal or other expert assistance is needed, the reader is urged to seek such advice from a knowledgeable professional.
New York Public Personnel Law. Email: publications@nycap.rr.com