Matter of Lebda v. Touro Coll. Sch. of Educ.
Docket Index No. 101271/24|Appeal No. 6509|Case No. 2025-02994|
Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research
- Filed
- Jurisdiction
- New York
- Court
- Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- Type
- Opinion
- Case type
- Administrative
- Disposition
- Dismissed
- Citation
- 2026 NY Slip Op 02783
- Docket numbers
- Index No101271/24Appeal No6509Case No2025-02994
Appeal from Supreme Court order denying an Article 78 petition seeking grade changes and reinstatement at Touro College School of Education.
Summary
The Appellate Division dismissed Amira Lebda’s appeal from a Supreme Court order that denied her CPLR article 78 petition seeking grade changes and reinstatement at Touro College School of Education. The court unanimously dismissed the appeal for failure to perfect the record on appeal because petitioner did not include her underlying complaint to the New York State Division of Human Rights or the DHR determination that formed the basis of the Article 78 proceeding. The court explained that without those materials meaningful appellate review was impossible and therefore declined to reach the merits.
Issues Decided
- Whether the appeal could proceed when the appellant failed to include the underlying Division of Human Rights complaint and determination in the record on appeal.
- Whether omission of essential administrative documents prevents meaningful appellate review of an Article 78 proceeding.
Court's Reasoning
The court relied on the rule that an appellant must assemble a proper record on appeal under CPLR 5526. Because the appellant omitted the DHR complaint and the DHR determination that underpinned the Article 78 proceeding, the appellate court could not undertake meaningful review. Citing precedent, the court held that such an omission justifies dismissal for failure to perfect the appeal rather than reaching the substantive claims.
Authorities Cited
- CPLR 5526
- Sebag v Narvaez60 AD3d 485 (1st Dept 2009), lv denied 13 NY3d 711 (2009)
Parties
- Appellant
- Amira A. Lebda
- Respondent
- Touro College School of Education
- Judge
- Denise M. Dominguez
- Judge
- Webber, J.P.
- Judge
- Moulton
- Judge
- Mendez
- Judge
- Higgitt
- Judge
- Michael
- Attorney
- Michael P. Collins
Key Dates
- Decision date
- 2026-05-05
- Order entered (Supreme Court)
- 2024-11-08
What You Should Do Next
- 1
Assemble complete appellate record
Locate and include the New York State Division of Human Rights complaint and the DHR determination, plus any other documents relied on in the Article 78 proceeding, and refile or move to reinstate the appeal.
- 2
Consult counsel
Speak with an attorney experienced in administrative and appellate practice to ensure the record is properly compiled and procedural requirements under the CPLR are met.
- 3
Consider trial-court remedies
If reinstatement of the appeal is not available, consider returning to Supreme Court to supplement the record or to seek relief appropriate to correcting the procedural defect.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What did the court decide?
- The Appellate Division dismissed the appeal because the appellant failed to provide the administrative complaint and determination needed for review.
- Who is affected by this decision?
- Primarily the appellant, Amira Lebda, whose appeal cannot proceed unless she corrects the record; the college’s position is unaffected by a merits ruling.
- What happens next?
- The dismissal ends this appeal unless the appellant moves to reinstate by properly perfecting the appeal or pursues other available remedies in the trial court.
- Why did the court dismiss rather than decide the case on the merits?
- Because key documents (the DHR complaint and determination) were missing from the appellate record, making meaningful review impossible under controlling rules and precedent.
- Can this be appealed further?
- The dismissal is the appellate disposition; the appellant may seek to perfect the record and request reinstatement or seek further relief if permitted, but there is no immediate merits appeal to higher court without curing the record deficiency.
The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.
Full Filing Text
Matter of Lebda v Touro Coll. Sch. of Educ. - 2026 NY Slip Op 02783 Matter of Lebda v Touro Coll. Sch. of Educ. 2026 NY Slip Op 02783 May 5, 2026 Appellate Division, First Department In the Matter of Amira A. Lebda, Petitioner-Appellant, v Touro College School of Education, Respondent-Respondent. Decided and Entered: May 05, 2026 Index No. 101271/24|Appeal No. 6509|Case No. 2025-02994| Before: Webber, J.P., Moulton, Mendez, Higgitt, Michael, JJ. Amira A. Lebda, appellant pro se. Bond, Schoeneck & King, PLLC, White Plains (Michael P. Collins of counsel), for respondent. Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Denise M. Dominguez, J.), entered on or about November 8, 2024, in this proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, which denied petitioner's order to show cause seeking a change in grades received while enrolled at respondent Touro College School of Education and reinstatement to the program from which she had been dismissed, unanimously dismissed, without costs, for failure to perfect the appeal in accordance with the CPLR. An appellant is obliged to assemble a proper record on appeal ( see CPLR 5526). Petitioner's failure to include her claim filed with the New York State Division of Human Rights (DHR) or the determination of the DHR underlying this article 78 proceeding in the record before us "renders meaningful appellate review of this matter impossible" ( Sebag v Narvaez , 60 AD3d 485, 486 [1st Dept 2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 711 [2009]). THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT. ENTERED: May 5, 2026