Difference between revisions of "Altieri v. New York City Dep't of Educ."
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(New page: In ''Altieri v. New York City Dep't of Educ.'', 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33342 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 15, 2005), the federal court dismissed a Section 1983 action on summary judgment beca...) |
FernoKlump (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | In ''Altieri v. New York City Dep't of Educ.'', 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33342 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 15, 2005), the [[federal]] court dismissed a [[Section 1983]] action on [[summary judgment]] because "Plaintiffs have proffered no evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that [the defendant school superintendent's] allegedly retailatory actions were taken pursuant to any policy or widespread custom or usage of the" [[New York City]] Department of Education. | + | In '''''Altieri v. New York City Dep't of Educ.''''', 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33342 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 15, 2005), the [[federal]] court dismissed a [[Section 1983]] action on [[summary judgment]] because "Plaintiffs have proffered no evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that [the defendant school superintendent's] allegedly retailatory actions were taken pursuant to any policy or widespread custom or usage of the" [[New York City]] Department of Education. |
The plaintiffs, parent teacher association (PTA) officials, alleged they were terminated by a retaliatory action of the since-deceased city school district superintendent. | The plaintiffs, parent teacher association (PTA) officials, alleged they were terminated by a retaliatory action of the since-deceased city school district superintendent. | ||
[[category:District Court Cases]] | [[category:District Court Cases]] | ||
[[category:Section 1983]] | [[category:Section 1983]] | ||
Revision as of 04:32, May 1, 2008
In Altieri v. New York City Dep't of Educ., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33342 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 15, 2005), the federal court dismissed a Section 1983 action on summary judgment because "Plaintiffs have proffered no evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that [the defendant school superintendent's] allegedly retailatory actions were taken pursuant to any policy or widespread custom or usage of the" New York City Department of Education.
The plaintiffs, parent teacher association (PTA) officials, alleged they were terminated by a retaliatory action of the since-deceased city school district superintendent.