In The Matter of the Suspension of the Teaching Certificates of Jesenia Chester, Board of Education of the Township of South Brunswick, Middlesex County, 5/23/2024, (#200-24)

200-24
New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Final Decision
In the Matter of the Suspension of the
Teaching Certificates of Jesenia Chester,
Board of Education of the Township of
South Brunswick, Middlesex County
Synopsis
In this matter on remand, the petitioning Board alleged that respondent – a non-tenured teacher –
resigned her position on inadequate notice and sought to suspend her teaching certificate for
unprofessional 	conduct 	pursuant 	to 	N.J.S.A. 	18A:26-10. 	Respondent 	taught 	kindergarten 	in 	a
South Brunswick school during the 2021-2022 school year and the Board asserted that her contract was
renewed at a Board meeting on May 12, 2022. 	However, on August 4, 2022, respondent sent the
District an email resigning her position effective September 1, 2022 and did not return to her position
for the start of the new school year; she asserted that she had never received or signed a contract of
employment for the 2022-2023 school year. After a hearing in the Office of Administrative Law, the ALJ
concluded that respondent had engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to give the Board 60 days’
notice of her resignation. 	Following review by the Commissioner of Education, the matter was
remanded to the OAL for further fact finding as the record was devoid of information needed to reach a
final determination in the case.
On 	remand, the 	ALJ found, 	inter 	alia, that: 	the 	mandated notice 	requirement 	set 	forth 	in
N.J.S.A. 18A:28-8 is applicable to tenured staff members, but does not apply here given respondent’s
non-tenured status; the notice requirement for non-tenured individuals is governed by N.J.S.A. 18A:26-
10, which authorizes the suspension of a teaching certificate “for wrongful cessation of performance of
duties”; in this situation, respondent resigned after completion of her teaching duties for the 2021-2022
school year and never received or signed a written contract to continue her employment for the 2022-
2023 school year; 	while respondent did sign a written contract for the 2021-2022 school year that
included a 60 day notice provision, no such contract existed regarding her employment during the 2022-
2023 school year as she never accepted an offer of continued employment in writing; consequently,
respondent was not under contract when she submitted her resignation on August 4, 2022, as her 2021-
2022 employment contract had expired at the end of June. The evidence on remand failed to
demonstrate that respondent is guilty of unprofessional conduct within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 18A:26-
10 so as to justify the Commissioner’s suspension of respondent’s certificate. The ALJ concluded that no
express contract existed between the parties regarding respondent’s employment for the 2022-2023
school year; accordingly, the Board’s request to suspend respondent’s teaching certificate was denied.
Upon review, the Commissioner adopted the April 2024 Initial Decision as the final decision in this
matter. Accordingly, the Order to Show Cause to suspend Jesenia Chester’s teaching certificates was
dismissed.
This synopsis is not part of the Commissioner’s decision. It has been prepared for the convenience of the reader.
It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Commissioner.

New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Final Decision
In the Matter of the Suspension of the Teaching
Certificates of Jesenia Chester, Board of
Education of the Township of South Brunswick,
Middlesex County.
The record of this matter and the Initial Decision of the Office of Administrative Law (OAL)
have been reviewed and considered. The parties did not file exceptions.
Respondent Jesenia Chester was previously employed by petitioner, Board of Education
of the Township of South Brunswick (Board), as a nontenured teacher. The Board filed an Order
to Show Cause to suspend respondent’s teaching certificates pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:26-10,
which provides that “[a]ny teaching staff member employed by a board of education . . . who
shall, without the consent of the board . . . cease to perform his duties before the expiration of
the term of his employment, shall be deemed guilty of unprofessional conduct, and the
commissioner may, upon receiving notice thereof, suspend his certificates for a period not
exceeding one year.” The Order to Show Cause alleged that respondent had committed
unprofessional conduct by resigning from her teaching position without providing the Board with
sixty days’ notice.
In August 2023, upon review of the parties’ written submissions, the Administrative Law
Judge (ALJ) issued an Initial Decision granting the Order to Show Cause. In September 2023, the
200-24
OAL Dkt. No. EDU 09886-23 (EDU 10542-22 on remand)
Agency Dkt. No. 284-10/22

2
acceptance of the Board’s offer of employment and, if such acceptance was given, the terms of
the employment contract.
In April 2024, the ALJ issued an Initial Decision after remand recommending that the
Order to Show Cause be dismissed because: (1) no written contract existed regarding
respondent’s employment as a teacher for the 2022-2023 school year; (2) respondent never
accepted the Board’s offer of employment for the 2022-2023 school year in writing; (3)
respondent was not under contract when she submitted her resignation on August 4, 2022, as
her 2021-2022 employment contract had expired; and (4) the evidence failed to demonstrate
that respondent is guilty of unprofessional conduct within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 18A:26-10.
Upon review, the Commissioner adopts the April 2024 Initial Decision as the final decision
in this matter. As a nontenured teacher, respondent’s notice obligations are established by the
terms of her employment contract. In re Suspension of Teaching Certificates of Melissa Van Pelt,
Gray Charter Sch., Newark, Essex Cnty., Commissioner Decision No. 170-09 at 3 (May 29, 2009),
aff’d, 414 N.J. Super. 440 (App. Div. 2010). N.J.S.A. 18A:27-10 requires boards of education to
provide nontenured teaching staff members with a written offer of a contract for employment,
or a written notice that employment will not be offered, on or before May 15 of each year.
N.J.S.A. 18A:27-12 requires teaching staff members to accept employment offers in writing on or
before June 1. If they do not accept the offers in writing, then their employment is not renewed.
Here, the Board did not provide respondent with a written employment contract for the
2022-2023 school year. Moreover, respondent did not accept the Board’s offer of employment
for the 2022-2023 school year in writing. Because she was not under contract at the time of her
Commissioner remanded the matter to the OAL for further fact-finding regarding respondent’s

3
violate N.J.S.A. 18A:26-10 as she did not cease to perform her duties before the expiration of her
employment term.
Accordingly, the Order to Show Cause to suspend Jesenia Chester’s teaching certificates
is hereby dismissed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.1
ACTING COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
Date of Decision: May 23, 2024
Date of Mailing: May 28, 2024
1 This decision may be appealed to the Appellate Division of the Superior Court pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:6-
9.1. Under N.J.Ct.R. 2:4-1(b), a notice of appeal must be filed with the Appellate Division within 45 days from the
date of mailing of this decision.
resignation, respondent had no notice obligations to the Board. Therefore, respondent did not

New Jersey is an Equal Opportunity Employer
State of New Jersey
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
INITIAL DECISION
OAL DKT. NO. EDU 09886-23
AGENCY DKT. NO. 284-10/22
(EDU 10542-22 On Remand)
IN RE SUSPENSION OF THE TEACHING
CERTIFICATE OF JESENIA CHESTER.
_______________________________________
Marie-Lawrence Fabian, Esq., for petitioner Board of Education of the Township
of South Brunswick (Porzio, Bromberg & Newman, attorneys)
Jesenia Chester, respondent, pro se
Record Closed: February 28, 2024 Decided: April 15, 2024
BEFORE JOAN M. BURKE, ALJ:
STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Petitioner Board of Education of the Township of South Brunswick (the Board)
seeks an order suspending the teaching certificate of respondent, Jesenia Chester (
respondent, Ms. Chester), for a period of one year based upon the allegation that she
resigned from her teaching position with inadequate notice. At the request of petitioner,
the Commissioner of Education issued an Order to Show Cause on October 7, 2022,
ordering respondent to show cause why her teaching certificate should not be suspended
for unprofessional conduct pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:26-10. Respondent filed an Answer

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 09886-23
2
on November 14, 2022, and the matter was transmitted to the Office of Administrative
Law on November 28, 2022, for determination as a contested case. N.J.S.A. 52:14B-1
to -15; N.J.S.A. 52:14F-1 to -13. The parties requested that the matter be decided in a
“summary fashion” without a hearing based on the papers that were submitted.
An Initial Decision was issued by the undersigned on August 2, 2023. (C-1.) On
September 14, 2023, the Commissioner issued a decision remanding the case to the OAL
for additional fact finding. (C-2.) On December 7, 2023, a status conference was held
with the parties, and a scheduling order was made for the submission of briefs. Upon
receipt of the briefs, the record closed on February 28, 2024.
ISSUES PRESENTED ON REMAND
The remand decision presents the following issues for adjudication:
1. Does the contract under which the respondent was employed for the
2021−2022 school year contain a sixty-day-notice provision?
2. Is there a written acceptance of the Board’s offer of continued employment
following the May 12, 2022, Board meeting?
FINDINGS OF FACT
The factual findings of the Initial Decision in EDU 10542-22 are incorporated herein
by reference. The petitioner’s brief and affidavit of Kimberly Maloy-White, along with the
respondent’s letter brief submitted, reveal the following additional uncontroverted facts,
and I FIND:
On August 26, 2021, the Board entered into an employment contract (contract)
with the respondent. (P-A.) The respondent signed the contract on September 25, 2021.
(Ibid.) There is a notice paragraph in the contract that states: “It is hereby agreed by the
parties hereto that this contract may at any time be terminated by either party to the other
60 days’ notice in writing of intension to terminate the same . . . .” (Ibid.)

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 09886-23
3
On or about April 23, 2022, the respondent acknowledged receipt of the
Summative Performance Report of Practice Standards (Report). (P-B.) At the end of this
Report, it states, “Ms. Chester will develop the Independent Goal in her Professional
Development Plan (PDP) for next year in collaboration with her supervisor . . . .” (Ibid.)
On May 13, 2022, the Board notified the respondent in a memorandum that she
had been reappointed to the position of teacher at Constable Elementary School. The
effective date was September 1, 2022, continuing until June 30, 2023. (See P-C.)
On June 20, 2022, the respondent acknowledged the Teacher/Education
Specialist Composite Score Report. (P-D.) In this report, under the paragraph titled
Recommendation, it states, “Recommended for continued employment.” (Ibid.)
Arguments of the Parties
The petitioner argues that the respondent signed the summative evaluation, which
informed her that an offer of employment would be forthcoming. (Pet’r’s Br. at 2.) In
addition, in the memo dated May 13, 2022, the respondent was informed that she was
recommended for continued employment during the 2022−2023 school year. (Ibid.)
The petitioner further alleges that “[t]he memo ends with the following: If you
have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.” (Ibid.) The respondent did
not contact the petitioner and did not inform the Board that “she might not return, thereby
creating the expectation that she would return to teach the next year.” (Pet’r’s Br. at 3.)
The petitioner further argues that respondent “accepted the renewal contract, but then
decided to resign on short notice. To find that Ms. Chester did not accept such
employment is to elevate form over substance.” (Ibid.)
Respondent argues that petitioner’s exhibit D states, “under the heading of
reappointment of non-tenured professional personnel,” that the contract runs from
September 1, 2022, through June 30, 2023. (Resp’t’s Br. at 2.) Thus, “without signing of
a contract, no salary, benefits, classroom designation discussion, I am under the

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 09886-23
4
impression that I am not under any contract at the time of placing my resignation on
August 4, 2022 and therefore within my rights to resign at any time.” (Id. at 2−3.)
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:28-8, a “teaching staff member, under tenure of service,
desiring to relinquish his position shall give the employing board of education at least 60
days written notice of his intention, unless the board shall approve of a release on shorter
notice and if he fails to give such notice he shall be deemed guilty of unprofessional
conduct, and the commissioner may suspend his certificate for not more than one year.”
(Emphasis added.) By its express terms, this mandated sixty-day-notice requirement only
applies to tenured teaching staff members. Carrelle v. Bloomfield Twp. Bd. of Educ.,
2004 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 1283 (Feb. 9, 2004). It is undisputed that respondent had been
employed by the Board for only one year at the time that she provided notice of her intent
not to return to the South Brunswick School District. Accordingly, the mandated notice
requirement set forth in N.J.S.A. 18A:28-8 is not applicable to the present situation given
respondent’s non-tenured status.
The notice requirement for non-tenured individuals, such as respondent, is
governed by N.J.S.A. 18A:26-10, which authorizes the suspension of a teaching
certificate “for wrongful cessation of performance of duties.” The statute directs, in
pertinent part:
Any teaching staff member employed by a board of education
. . . who shall, without the consent of the board . . . cease to
perform his duties before the expiration of the term of his
employment, shall be deemed guilty of unprofessional
conduct, and the commissioner may . . . suspend his
certificate for a period not exceeding one year.
[N.J.S.A. 18A:26-10 (emphasis added).]
See also N.J.A.C. 6A:9-17.9. The underlying purpose of N.J.S.A. 18A:26-10 is “to provide
notice to the school so that a suitable replacement can be hired without adversely

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 09886-23
5
impacting students.” Penns Grove-Carneys Point Bd. of Educ. v. Leinen, 94 N.J.A.R.2d
(EDU) 405, 407.
The Commissioner has recognized that the language of N.J.S.A. 18A:26-10 “is
clear and explicit as to the requisite conditions for a cause of action to arise under its
terms, namely, 1) a teaching staff member ceases to perform his [or her] duties before
the expiration of the term of his [or her] employment, and 2) the board does not consent
to the teaching staff member's action.” In re Suspension of the Teaching Certificate of
Fesolowich, 2006 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 915 (Sept. 14, 2006). The Commissioner has further
explained that “[i]t is well-grounded in education law that determination of the sufficiency
of a term of notice pursuant to this statute is dictated by the terms of the parties’
employment contract and any resignation or termination must be in accordance with the
terms of such agreement.” In re Suspension of the Teaching Certificate of Van Pelt, 2009
N.J. AGEN LEXIS 1232 (May 29, 2009), aff’d, 414 N.J. Super. 440 (App. Div. 2010);
Carrelle, 2004 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 1283 (Feb. 9, 2004). In other words, N.J.S.A. 18A:26-
10 requires non-tenured teachers to abide by whatever notice provision is contained in
their employment contracts.
A non-tenured teacher who violates the notice/termination requirements outlined
in his or her contract of employment will generally be found to be guilty of “unprofessional
conduct” within the intendment of N.J.S.A. 18A:26-10, warranting the suspension of the
teacher’s certificate. See In re Suspension of the Teaching Certificate of Creekmur, 2011
N.J. AGEN LEXIS 624 (Nov. 21, 2011), adopted, 2012 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 600 (Jan. 4,
2012); In re Suspension of the Teaching Certificate of Ponti, 2010 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 103
(Feb. 18, 2010), adopted, 2011 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 264 (May 12, 2010), aff’d, 2011 N.J.
Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1105 (App. Div. May 3, 2011); In re Suspension of the Teaching
Certificate of Orban, 2009 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 296 (May 13, 2009), adopted, 2009 N.J.
AGEN LEXIS 729 (June 11, 2009); In re Suspension of the Teaching Certificate of Stokes,
2009 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 316 (June 2, 2009), adopted, 2009 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 655 (July
15, 2009), aff’d, 2010 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1776 (App. Div. July 27, 2010); In re
Suspension of the Teaching Certificate of Van Pelt, 2009 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 237 (April
14, 2009), adopted, 2009 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 1232 (May 29, 2009), aff’d, 414 N.J. Super.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 09886-23
6
440 (App. Div. 2010); Borough of Alpine Bd. of Educ. v. Yuz, 2008 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 633
(July 17, 2008), adopted, 2008 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 1178 (Sept. 23, 2008).
The above cases, however, are markedly distinguishable from the present matter.
In each of those cases, the teacher had executed a contract of employment agreeing to
teach for a specified term, resigned before the expiration of his or her contract, and failed
to comply with the termination provisions of his or her employment contract. Given these
facts, each teacher “cease[d] to perform his [or her] duties before the expiration of the
term of his [or her] employment,” amounting to “unprofessional conduct,” and resulting in
the suspension of the teacher’s certificate. N.J.S.A. 18A:26-10; see In re Suspension of
the Teaching Certificates of Walker, 2011 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 526 (Oct. 5, 2011), adopted,
2011 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 874 (Nov. 10, 2011) (holding that the respondent’s employment
contract created two separate terms of employment, and respondent did not cease to
perform her duties before the expiration of the term of her employment in violation of
N.J.S.A. 18A:26-10 by resigning with two weeks’ notice during her probationary period).
Also, in In the Matter of the Suspension of the Teaching Certificate of Carreno,
2012 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 226 (May 3, 2012), adopted, Comm’r (June 14, 2012),
https://www.nj.gov/education/legal/commissioner/2012/jun/239-12.pdf, the respondent
worked for the Bergen County Technical School (BCTS) from September 1, 2009, to June
30, 2010, and she received a salary, pension contributions, and other benefits in the
contract of employment she had entered into for the 2009−2010 school year. The
respondent had received a contract of employment in early 2010. The term of that
contract was for the 2010−2011 school year. The respondent did not sign the contract,
and on August 31, 2010, the respondent sent an email thanking the school for the
opportunity, but stating that due to personal financial circumstances, she had accepted
another position elsewhere. In accepting the respondent’s position, the Commissioner
stated:
N.J.S.A. 18A:27-11 explains:
Should any board of education fail to give to any
nontenured teaching staff member either an offer of
contract for employment for the next succeeding year or

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 09886-23
7
a notice that such employment will not be offered, all
within the time and in the manner provided by this act
[i.e., May 15], then said board of education shall be
deemed to have offered to that teaching staff member
continued employment for the next succeeding school
year upon the same terms and conditions but with such
increases in salary as may be required by law or policies
of the board of education.
[Emphasis added.]
The Commissioner went on to state:
In other words, a nontenured employee may regard the
absence of either a contract renewal letter or a nonrenewal
letter as tantamount to an “offer” of employment. However,
there is nothing in N.J.S.A. 18A:27-11 that requires the
nontenured teacher to accept the offer. In the present case,
respondent did not accept the implied offer, and petitioner
waited until August to address the issue, i.e., by sending
respondent a contract to sign.
The only express statutory deadline for the
acceptance—by nontenured teachers—of employment offers
can be found in N.J.S.A. 18A:27-12. That statute requires that
those nontenured employees who wish to accept employment
offered to them on or before May 15, must accept in writing by
June 1. It appears undisputed that respondent did not do so.
Thus, even acknowledging that the absence of a nonrenewal
letter constituted an offer of employment to respondent, the
fact remains that she did not timely accept said offer.
Petitioner’s expectation that she would return to teach in the
next school year was consequently unwarranted. Further, in
the absence of a contract, respondent was not obligated to
give sixty days’ notice of her decision not to return.
[Ibid.]
Here the facts are similar to those in Carreno, 2012 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 226 (May
3, 2012), adopted, Comm’r (June 14, 2012),
https://www.nj.gov/education/legal/commissioner/2012/jun/239-12.pdf, except no
contract was sent to the respondent at the time she had submitted her resignation. In

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 09886-23
8
fact, in the case at bar, the respondent notified the Board on August 4, 2022, of her
resignation. In Carreno, the respondent had received a contract but never signed it and
notified the BCTS of her resignation on August 31, 2010, one day before the 2010−2011
school year was set to begin. In the current matter, respondent argues that she was
under no contract at the time she submitted her letter of resignation because she did not
receive or sign a contract. There is no dispute that she was offered employment.
However, the determination of whether respondent provided sufficient notice to the Board
pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:26-10 “is dictated by the terms of the parties’ employment
contract, and any resignation or termination must be in accordance with the terms of such
agreement.” Van Pelt, 2009 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 1232 at *4 (May 29, 2009). A non-tenured
teacher will be deemed guilty of “unprofessional conduct” within the meaning of N.J.S.A.
18A:26-10 if the teacher fails to comply with the termination/notice requirements in his or
her contract of employment. However, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:27-12:
If the teaching staff member desires to accept such
employment he shall notify the board of education of such
acceptance, in writing, on or before June 1, in which event
such employment shall continue as provided for herein. In the
absence of such notice of acceptance the provisions of this
article shall no longer be applicable.
I CONCLUDE that no express contract existed between the parties regarding
respondent’s employment as a teacher for the 2022−2023 school year. Petitioner did not
send a contract to the respondent. The petitioner admitted this would not be done until
after their Board meeting on August 25, 2022. The petitioner further acknowledged that
because the respondent had submitted a resignation on August 4, 2022, it would be
approved at the same Board meeting on August 25, 2022. While there were various
notices of employment for the 2022−2023 school year (i.e., Summative Performance
Report of Practice Standards, a memorandum dated May 13, 2022, Education Composite
Score Report), the record is bereft of evidence that the Board had provided respondent
with a written offer or a contract for employment for the 2022−2023 school year that the
respondent accepted. See N.J.S.A. 18A:27-10; N.J.S.A. 18A:27-12. Respondent, in her
certification in the initial decision, did admit that she may have said, “thank you for the
opportunity”; however, there was nothing in writing that indicated that this was said or that

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 09886-23
9
this was a written acceptance of the contract. See In re Chester, 2023 N.J. AGEN LEXIS
579 (Aug. 2, 2023). (C-1.) Furthermore, as the Commissioner pointed out in Carreno,
https://www.nj.gov/education/legal/commissioner/2012/jun/239-12.pdf, and is applicable
in this matter:
Thus, even acknowledging that the absence of a nonrenewal
letter constituted an offer of employment to respondent, the
fact remains that she did not timely accept said offer.
Petitioner’s expectation that she would return to teach in the
next school year was consequently unwarranted. Further, in
the absence of a contract, respondent was not obligated to
give sixty days’ notice of her decision not to return.
I CONCLUDE that the respondent did not cease to perform her duties before the
expiration of the term of her employment because she tendered her resignation after her
2021−2022 employment contract had expired and before an employment contract existed
between the parties for the next school year. I CONCLUDE that the evidence fails to
demonstrate that respondent is guilty of unprofessional conduct within the meaning of
N.J.S.A. 18A:26-10 so as to justify the Commissioner’s suspension of her teaching
certificate. Although I recognize that the respondent’s departure may have placed the
Board at a disadvantage of not having a teacher, the statute makes clear that a non-
tenured employee’s professional obligations are those established by the “term of
employment” agreed upon by the parties and not by any intrinsic notion of
professionalism. Walker, 2011 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 526 at *13 (Oct. 5, 2001). If the Board
wanted to impose a commitment upon the respondent to teach during the 2022−2023
school year, it should have done so by requiring her to take action in writing to either
accept or decline a written offer or a contract of employment before August 2022.
ORDER
Based on the foregoing, it is ORDERED that the Board’s request that the
Commissioner suspends the teaching certificate of Jesenia Chester pursuant to N.J.S.A.
18A:28-8 and/or N.J.S.A. 18A:26-10 is DENIED, and that this matter is hereby
DISMISSED.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 09886-23
10
I hereby FILE this initial decision with the COMMISSIONER OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION for consideration.
This recommended decision may be adopted, modified or rejected by the
COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, who by law is authorized
to make a final decision in this matter. If the Commissioner of the Department of
Education does not adopt, modify or reject this decision within forty-five days, and unless
such time limit is otherwise extended, this recommended decision shall become a final
decision in accordance with N.J.S.A. 52:14B-10.
Within thirteen days from the date on which this recommended decision was
mailed to the parties, any party may file written exceptions with the COMMISSIONER OF
THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, ATTN: BUREAU OF CONTROVERSIES AND
DISPUTES, 100 Riverview Plaza, 4th Floor, P.O. Box 500, Trenton, New Jersey
08625-0500, marked “Attention: Exceptions.” A copy of any exceptions must be sent to
the judge and to the other parties.
April 15, 2024
DATE JOAN M. BURKE, ALJ
Date Received at Agency: April 15, 2024
Date Mailed to Parties: April 15, 2024

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 09886-23
11
APPENDIX
WITNESSES
For Petitioner
None
For Respondent
None
EXHIBITS
For Petitioner
Petitioner’s Brief with the Affidavit of Kimberly Maloy-White, along with Exhibits
P-A through P-G
For Respondent
Respondent’s Brief
Judge’s Exhibits
C-1 Initial Decision, EDU 10542-22
C-2 Commissioner’s Decision, EDU 10542-22