Pereira v. State Bd. of Educ., 304 Conn. 1

37 A.3d 625 (2012) · Supreme Court of Connecticut · February 28, 2012 · No. No. 18833

Summary

The Connecticut Supreme Court considered whether the State Board of Education could authorize reconstitution of the Bridgeport Board of Education without first requiring the local board to complete statutory training. The court held that General Statutes § 10-223e (h) imposed a mandatory, nonwaivable training requirement, and that the local board's resolution requesting reconstitution did not waive it. The court therefore concluded that the authorization to reconstitute the local board was void.

Holdings

  1. General Statutes § 10-223e (h) imposes a mandatory condition precedent: the State Board of Education must require the local board to undergo and complete the training described in § 10-223e (c)(2)(M) before the State Board may authorize the Commissioner to reconstitute the local board.
  2. The training requirement is not subject to waiver by the local board of education.
  3. The State Board's failure to require the Bridgeport Board of Education to undergo and complete the statutory training rendered the State Board's authorization for reconstitution void.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether General Statutes § 10-223e (h) requires the State Board of Education to require a local board of education to undergo and complete specified training before authorizing the Commissioner of Education to reconstitute that board.
  2. Whether a local board of education may waive the statutory training requirement or render it unnecessary by adopting a resolution requesting reconstitution.
  3. Whether the State Board's failure to comply with the training prerequisite rendered its authorization of reconstitution void.

Disposition

remanded

Cases Cited (16)

  • Connecticut Podiatric Medical Assn. v. Health Net of Connecticut, Inc., 302 Conn. 464, 471, 28 A.3d 958 (2011)(followed)
  • Grady v. Somers, 294 Conn. 324, 333, 984 A.2d 684 (2009)(followed)
  • Wiseman v. Armstrong, 295 Conn. 94, 101, 989 A.2d 1027 (2010)(followed)
  • Santiago v. State, 261 Conn. 533, 540-44, 804 A.2d 801 (2002)(followed)
  • Brown & Brown, Inc. v. Blumenthal, 297 Conn. 710, 726, 1 A.3d 21 (2010)(followed)
  • Interlude, Inc. v. Skurat, 266 Conn. 130, 143, 831 A.2d 235 (2003)(followed)
  • New Haven v. State Board of Education, 228 Conn. 699, 703-05, 638 A.2d 589 (1994)(followed)
  • Stewart v. Tunxis Service Center, 237 Conn. 71, 73-80, 676 A.2d 819 (1996)(distinguished)
  • Rosado v. Bridgeport Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp., 292 Conn. 1, 57-58, 970 A.2d 656, cert. denied, 559 U.S. 1090 (2010)(limited)
  • Ethics Commission v. Freedom of Information Commission, 302 Conn. 1, 8, 23 A.3d 1211 (2011)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 16.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…