No. Petitioner, an ATR, was charged with committing 40 acts of misconduct, including dereliction of duty and incompetence. After a hearing she was terminated and she appealed.
On appeal the petitioner did not challenge the finding nor deny that she ignored the efforts of numerous supervisors and administrators to remedy her pedagogical deficiencies , but rather contended that s he became demoralized when she was assigned to the absent teacher reserve pool and did not have permanent assignment at one school.
The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed her termination finding it not unduly harsh under the circumstances. The Court also found that she was properly placed in the ATR pool.
2016 NY Slip Op 04307. IN RE DAWN WEBB, Petitioner-Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, ET AL., Respondents-Respondents. 1355, 654123/13. Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department. Decided June 2, 2016.