Trial court may not substitute its judgment for that of the arbitrator when the record supports the arbitrator’s ruling

To contact us Click HERE

Trial court may not substitute its judgment for that ofthe arbitrator when the record supports the arbitrator’s ruling
Supreme Court, New York County, vacated, in part, an arbitrator’s finding that a tenured teacher guilty of disciplinary charges alleging sexual misconduct anddismissed certain specifications, vacated the penalty imposed by thearbitrator -- termination of the teacher's employment, and remanding theproceeding for a new hearing before a new arbitrator to determine if the teacher was guilty of the surviving allegations and for a redetermination of the penalty to be imposed in the event thenew arbitrator found the teacher guilty of one or more of the surviving disciplinary chargesand specifications.
The Appellate Division(1) reinstated the initial arbitrator’s findingof sexual misconduct and (2) reinstated the penalty imposed by the arbitrator, termination.
The court said that judicial review of the arbitrator’saward in this instance is limited to the grounds set out in CPLR §7511(b)1* as required by §3020-a(5) of the Education Law.
The court explained that where, as here, “the arbitration iscompulsory,” the excess of power standard under CPLR §7511(b) includes review of"whether the award is supported by evidence or other basis in reason, asmay be appropriate, and appearing in the record." Thus, the"determination must be in accord with due process and supported byadequate evidence, and must also be rational and satisfy the arbitrary andcapricious standards of CPLR Article 78."
The Appellate Division said there was adequate evidence to support thearbitrator's conclusion that teacher committed sexual misconduct by performingan "action that could reasonably be interpreted as soliciting a sexualrelationship" within the meaning of the relevant provisions in the collective bargaining agreement.By finding to the contrary, the Appellate Division said that Supreme Court“impermissibly substituted its own judgment for that of the arbitrator” bycrediting the teacher’s testimony that had been rejected by the arbitrator.
In light of the evidence, the Appellate Division said thatthe penalty of termination, notwithstanding teacher's “prior lack ofdisciplinary history,” did not shock its sense of fairness.
* §7511 of the Civil PracticeLaw and Rules provides for “Vacating or modifying” an arbitration award. Withrespect to “Grounds for Vacating,” §7511 (b)1 provides for the vacation of anarbitration award in the event the court finds that the rights of the partychallenging the award were prejudiced by:      (i) corruption, fraud ormisconduct in procuring the award; or      (ii) partiality of an arbitratorappointed as a neutral, except where the award was by confession; or      (iii) an arbitrator, or agency or person making the awardexceeded his power or so imperfectly executed it that a final and definiteaward upon the subject matter submitted was not made; or      (iv) failure tofollow the procedure of this article, unless the party applying to vacate theaward continued with the arbitration with notice of the defect and withoutobjection.
The decision is posted on the Internet at:http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2012/2012_06255.htm