Questions raised
§ 7803. Questions raised. The only questions that may be raised in a proceeding under this article are:
1. whether the body or officer failed to perform a duty enjoined upon it by law; or
2. whether the body or officer proceeded, is proceeding or is about to proceed without or in excess of jurisdiction; or
3. whether a determination was made in violation of lawful procedure, was affected by an error of law or was arbitrary and capricious or an abuse of discretion, including abuse of discretion as to the measure or mode of penalty or discipline imposed; or
4. whether a determination made as a result of a hearing held, and at which evidence was taken, pursuant to direction by law is, on the entire record, supported by substantial evidence.
5. A proceeding to review the final determination or order of the state review officer pursuant to subdivision three of section forty-four hundred four of the education law shall be brought pursuant to article four of this chapter and such subdivision; provided, however, that the provisions of this article shall not apply to any proceeding commenced on or after the effective date of this subdivision.
These are the only questions Article 78 can decide:
1. Did the body/officer fail to perform a duty the law requires? (this is old mandamus) ★
2. Did they act without or in excess of jurisdiction? (old prohibition) ★
3. Was the determination made in violation of lawful procedure, affected by an error of law, or arbitrary and capricious / an abuse of discretion — including abuse as to the measure or mode of penalty? ★ (This is the everyday standard for reviewing agency decisions.)
4. In a case decided after a required evidentiary hearing, is the determination supported by substantial evidence on the whole record? ★ (This is the one that gets transferred — see § 7804(g).)
5. A twist for state review officer determinations under Education Law § 4404(3): those go under Article 4, not Article 78, for proceedings started on/after that subdivision's effective date.
★ Know the difference: "arbitrary and capricious" (Q3) applies to most agency decisions; "substantial evidence" (Q4) applies only where the law required a hearing with evidence taken.
Marked in the text: penalties, time limits, sums of money. Editorial emphasis added by this edition; it does not appear in the statute as enacted.
This provision appears in Volume 2 — The JG-22 CPLR and in Volume 1 — The JG-22 in Plain English.