Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> New York Public Personnel Law

Labor & Employment Law

: New York Public Personnel Law

BOCES not entitled to claim Eleventh Amendment immunity if sued in federal courts

BOCES not entitled to claim Eleventh Amendment immunity if sued in federal courts
Carrie Gorton v Bruce Gettel and Sullivan County BOCES, USCA, 2nd Circuit, Docket # 17-3190-cv, decided January 28, 2009

Carrie Gorton filed a complaint in Federal District Court alleging that during her two years of employment as a counselor and recruiter at Sullivan County BOCES, she was harassed repeatedly by Bruce Gettel, a fellow teacher.

BOCES moved for summary judgment, contending that it was an arm of New York State and thus entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity. The district court denied its motion and BOCES appealed.

The U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, noted that in earlier cases it had held that neither local school boards [Woods v. Rondout Valley Cent. School Dist. Bd. of Educ., 466 F.3d 232] nor local school districts in New York State were arms of the state [Fay v. S. Colonie Cent. School Dist., 802 F.2d 21] and thus not within the ambit of Eleventh Amendment immunity available to states.

In the words of the Second Circuit, ?[A]s a general rule, state governments may not be sued in federal court unless they have waived their Eleventh Amendment immunity [and] Eleventh Amendment immunity extends to ?state agents and state instrumentalities that are, effectively, arms of a state.?

In contrast, said the court, such immunity does not extend to suits against municipal corporations or other governmental entities that are not an arm of the state.
The court cited six factors determine whether an entity is an arm of the state:

(1) how the entity is referred to in its documents of origin;

(2) how the governing members of the entity are appointed;

(3) how the entity is funded;

(4) whether the entity?s function is traditionally one of local or state government;

(5) whether the state has a veto power over the entity?s actions; and

(6) whether the entity?s financial obligations are binding upon the state.?

Finding that Sullivan County BOCES is a locally run entity affiliated with local school districts, the Circuit Court concluded that its liability would not reflect adversely on New York State and thus did not satisfy at least one of these six criteria.

Rejecting BOCES argument that it should enjoy immunity because the legislature has promulgated specific laws governing BOCES and because New York State treats BOCES differently than school districts, the court said ?This argument does not discharge [BOCES?] burden of showing that it is entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity and thus the District Court was correct in denying its motion for summary judgment on the ground of Eleventh Amendment immunity.

The full text of the decision is posted on the Internet at:
http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA3LTMxOTAtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/07-3190-cv_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysquery/irl95f4/4/hilite

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on February 04, 2009 (boomark / email).