# Petition — Farrell v. Carey

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385005_2214%3A1

## Record

- **Collection:** Supreme Court brief
- **Document type:** Petition
- **Published:** January 1, 1979
- **Citation:** 440 U.S. 914

## Text

eee

ra Supreme Court, 5 ea

anna een EET

DEC 15 1978
IN THE

caeemeanal

Supreme Court of the Withee

OCTOBER TERM, 1978 *

No. 78-965

JAMES A. FARRELL AND LouIS T. DILORENZO,
Petitioners,
¥.

HuGH CAREY, as Governor of the State of New York,
ERNEST L. BOYER, as Chancellor of the State University
of New York, and ALBERT W. BROWN, as President of
the State University College at Brockport,

Respondents.

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI
TO THE NEW YORK COURT OF APPEALS

MATTHEW W. FINKIN
School of Law
Southern Methodist University
Dallas, Texas 75275
(214) 692-2583

Counsel for Petitioners

WILSON - EPES PRINTING CoO., INC. - 789-0096 - WASHINGTON, D.C. 20001

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

of sliceniogdnnasingevamien 1
en i AENEAN EEE MC SCN Eo 2
ER Ee Se ee Oi ak trata 2
Constitutional Provision Involved _..........-2...-2.---eeeeeeeeeee-ee 2
I cnseimnedandaciimmpniapnmnintiilagens 2
PR Ta te ET aE 2

B. The Crucial Role of the Antinore Doctrine
Reasons for Granting the Writ ........000002202 eee

1. These cases present significant constitutional
issues not previously passed upon by this
gt ih en rs cB eae RE DUPE ROR ED 7

2. The Antinore doctrine is inconsistent with de-
cisions of this Court concerning the relation-
ship of majority rule to constitutional rights... 9

3. The Antinore doctrine is inconsistent with de-
cisions of this Court governing the waiver of
due process in other civil settings. 000000000000... 12

4. The Antinore doctrine engenders an intolerable
conflict between the state and federal courts in
New York concerning the construction of the
Fourteenth Amendment. .....022. 000000020. 14

I ihe as tissdi pie estiiaminaeteon esha nascacentasmmnpainnaigeien 16

Il

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Cases:

Abood v. Detroit Board of Educ., 431 U.S. 209
1 SPREE RR BAP) a
Aetna Insurance Co. v. Kennedy, 301 U.S. 389
fg NRPS ant srt NACI ely Ger eee Mel aoe Ee te
Antinore v. State of New York, 371 N.Y.S.2d 213
(4th Dept. 1975), aff'd mem., 40 N.Y.2d 921,
389 N.Y.S.2d 576, 358 N.E.2d 368 (1976) .........
Bignall v. North Idaho College, 588 F.2d 243 (9th
er ee ge ke
Bishop v. Wood, 426 U.S. 341 (1976) ..............0....
Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564 (1972) ....
Brady Vv. Bocrd of Regents, 242 N.W.2d 616 (Neb.
RR ae eb EO ee TS
Brookhart v. Janis, 384 U.S. 1 (1966) ....................
ae Board of Educ., 427 F. Supp. 945 (D. Colo.
TET sachet sad btetliiat takecllbcsdeedsbletigatch-abeisabacececdiéccieneeias
Chung Vv. Park, 514 F.2d 392 (8d Cir.), cert. den.,
Re EN
City of Madison v. Wisconsin Employment Rela-
tions Commission, 427 U.S. 167 (1976) ..............
Connecticut State Federation of Teachers v. Board
of Educ. Members, 588 F.2d 471 (2d Cir. 1976) ..
Fuentes v. Shevin, 407 U.S. 67 (1972) ........000......
Johnson Vv. Board of Regents, 377 F. Supp. 217
(W.D. Wis. 1974), aff'd mem., 510 F.2d 975
Ras ee OCT Se
Johnson Vv. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (1988) 0...
Kewin v. Board of Educ., 65 Mich. App. 472, 237
Sry a he
Klein v. Board of Higher Educ., 434 F. Supp.
en Nc
Levitt v. Board of Trustees, 376 F. Supp. 945 (D.
es NS er a a de ee
Lucas Vv. Colorado General Assembly, 377 U.S. 713
C5 BRM A trae RR ae one
Mills v. Long Island Rail Road Co., 515 F.2d 181
(2d Cir. 1975)

Ae eee een nnn ween
itt h ht tt ttt ttt tee

Page

10

11

Ill

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES—Continued

Page
Ohio Bell Tel. Co. v. Public Utilities Commission,
es I IES cited ecteintbinncwbseneisaaeetandemtncsons 13
Ohio ex rel. Eaton v. Price, 360 U.S. 246 (1959)... 6
D. H. Overmeyer Co. v. Frick Co., 405 U.S. 174
o: : | eR ee Se ee a Aanansekens 12,13
Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U.S. 593 (1972) ............ 8
Schneckcloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 (1973).. 12
West Virginia Board of Educ. v. Barnette, 319
co acenesaneibhaomniaeetoniion 10
Constitution of the United States:
pee OS RSE Sen ere re ere 9, 10, 14, 15
NOI SIRI ngciscienchetncincatssnresengs 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 15
Federal Statutes:
Fe 0 ED. ceberccsresensseseciennenenemnanconpecintstnnnassine 2
State Statutes and Regulations:
Alaska Stat. §§ 23.40.070—23.40.260 (1972) ........ 7
Conn. P.A. 566, L. 1975, §§ 1—11 .......................000+- 7
Del. Code tit. 19. §§ 1801—1312 (1974) .................. 7
Fla. Stat. §§ 447.201—447.607 (1976 Supp.) ....... 7-8
Hawaii Rev. Stat. §§ 89.1—89.20 (1975 Supp.) ...... 8
Iowa Code §§ 20.1—20.27 (1976 Supp.) ................-- 8
Kansas Stat. §§ 75-4321—75-4337 (1976 Supp.).... 8
Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 26, §$§ 1021—1034 (1975-76
UII) oaciccnceceriserncntisrnenticteotanincestnbammatersaripnaneesvonecnccecs 8
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 150E, §§ 1—15 (1976) .......... 8
Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 423.201—423.216 (1967)...... 8
Minn. Stat. §§ 179.61—179.76 (1976 Supp.) .......... 8
Mont. Rev. Codes §§ 59-1601—59-1617 (1975 Cum.
ID ivcccvcncicccrvcocvecensessntbnaiounshincononennectebetneenseaens 8
Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 48-401—48-838 (1974) .............. 8
N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. §8§ 273-A:1—273-A:16
DRIED codecs bans carerssissetstdsabnnpiaioncesnacnteincmegnicnneccsecs 8
N.J. Stat. §§ 34:13A-1—34:13A-11 (1976 Supp.).. 8

IV

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES—Continued

S ETC OP SOE, SU asic
N.Y. Civil Service Law § 63 (McKinney 1973)......
N.Y. Civil Service Law §§ 200—214 (McKinney

DGD Acciccnitentesiiitndinsntrisanlaieianiepuniaeahiemanecm: Cetra
New York CPLR § 5601(b) (1) .......
Rules and Regulations of the New York State

Civil Service Commission, Rule 4.5 (1972) .......
Ore. Rev. Stat. §$§ 243.650—243.782 (1975) ..........
Pa. Stat. tit. 43, §§ 1101-101—1101.2301 (1976

URI)

+ a — Z 2
el ol ke IN ee ee Eel Ce oe ite ae

Se

Te oe

27a
APPENDIX D

THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

99 Washington Avenue
Albany, New York 12230
November 6, 1978

Professor Mathew Sinkin [sic]
School of Law

South Methodist University
Dallas, Texas 75257

Dear Professor Sinkin: [sic]

At the request of Professor Sondra Dourant, I relate
here for your information certain findings as related
to me by Mr. Leonard Powell, Chief of the Bureau
of Education Data Systems of the New York State Edu-
cation Department.

For school fiscal year 1977-78 there were employed
in New York States Public Schools 172,394 teachers of
which 144,826 or 84% were tenured, 24,011 or 13.9%
were probationary, 3,097 or 1.8% were substitutes, and
460 or .8% were classified as unknown.

For your further information, you are advised that in
New York State permanent part-time teachers (those
employed for less than a full day on a regular basis)
who were not previously tenured employees and not teach-
ing on a part-time basis at the request of their board of
education, are neither considered probationary, tenured,
or substitute employees. This class of people have no
eligibility for either probationary or tenure status and
are not likely those considered among the ranks of those
listed as unknown.

28a

I trust that the foregoing information will meet your
needs.
Very truly yours,

/s/ Vito F. Longo
ViTo F. LONGO
VFL/cs

Enclosure
ec: Professor Sondra Dourant

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385005_2214%3A1. Public record. Not legal advice.