UTICA — The names of four individual Utica City School District Board of Education members were dropped from a lawsuit against them Friday in Oneida County Court. But other legal claims brought against them by suspended district Superintendent Bruce Karam, the district itself and recently appointed Acting Superintendent Brian Nolan remain very much in progress.

“Individual defendants were dropped as a result of legal strategy regarding the specific relief requested in this Article 78 proceeding, as opposed to Mr. Karam’s claims in contract and tort,” explained Giancarlo Facciponte, associate attorney with the East Syracuse-based Law Firm of Frank W. Miller., who represents Karam. “Note each individual is named in Mr. Karam’s currently pending federal lawsuit. The district remains a despondent in Mr. Karam’s Article 78 proceeding and the requested relief is still pending.”

An Article 78 proceeding is a legal action seeking to appeal an agency’s decision in court. In this case, it is seeking to appeal the decision of the board to place Karam on leave.

Board President Joseph Hobika Jr., Vice President Danielle Padulla, and board members Tennille Knoop and James Paul voted to place Karam on paid administrative leave in October pending an investigation into claims made against him by two district employees. Each of the four board members and Nolan were served court papers at their December board meeting notifying them of Karam’s pending legal action. 

Karam has filed both local and federal lawsuits in response to his suspension.

Part of Karam’s lawsuit claims the board members violated open meetings law and although the four have been stricken from the lawsuit as individuals, the claims of open meeting law violations remain in force.

“Mr. Karam’s Article 78 proceeding, which seeks primarily a finding that the district violated the open meetings law in bad faith, thus giving cause to vitiate their actions on the dates alleged, continues as normal,” Facciponte said. “As there appears to be some confusion in the media, Mr. Karam’s federal suit in the Northern District of New York is a distinct matter not impacted directly by decisions made in the Article 78 proceeding before Judge DelConte. Each of the individual respondents who was stipulated out of the Article 78 matter is a named defendant in the federal case.”

Facciponte added that although some of the board “consistently attempts to use its connections in the media to indicate otherwise, in reality, Mr. Karam still has not been subject to any disciplinary charges whatsoever, and remains on paid leave as a result of the board’s actions with no signs of this situation changing any time soon.”

When contacted, Hobika referred comment to Attorney Michael Arcuri of the Ward, Arcuri, Foley & Dwyer law firm in New Hartford. Arcuri did not immediately respond to a call for comment.