Genera Fisher v. New Jersey Department of Education, Office of School Bus Safety, 9/30/26 (#391-26)

391-26
OAL Dkt. No. EDU 19079-25
Agency Dkt. No. 351-10/25
New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Final Decision
Genera Fisher,
Petitioner,
v.
New Jersey Department of Education, Office of School Bus
Safety,
Respondent.
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.
Upon review, the Commissioner concurs with the Administrative Law Judge that petitioner violated
N.J.S.A. 18A:39-28 when she failed to conduct a visual inspection of her school bus at the end of her
transportation route and, as a result, a child remained on board at the end of the route.
Accordingly, the Initial Decision is adopted as the final decision in this matter and the petition of appeal
is dismissed. Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:39-29(a), petitioner’s “S” endorsement shall be suspended for six months
from the date of this decision. Respondent is directed to notify the Motor Vehicle Commission of its obligation
to suspend petitioner’s “S” endorsement, and to notify petitioner’s employer that she is ineligible during the
period of suspension for continued employment as a school bus driver.
IT IS SO ORDERED.1
COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
Date of Decision: 	9/30/26
Date of Mailing: 	9/30/26
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.

New Jersey is an Equal Opportunity Employer
INITIAL DECISION
SUMMARY DECISION
OAL DKT. NO. EDU 19079-25
AGENCY DKT. NO. 351-10/25
GENERA FISHER,
Petitioner,
v.
NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION, OFFICE OF STUDENT
PROTECTION,
Respondent.
Genera Fisher, petitioner, pro se
David Kalisky, Deputy Attorney General, for respondent (Jennifer Davenport,
Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney)
Record Closed: June 28, 2026 Decided: August 24, 2026
BEFORE EDWARD J. DELANOY, JR., Deputy Director and ALAJ:
STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Petitioner, Genera Fisher (Fisher), challenges the revocation of her bus driver “S”
endorsement. The revocation is due to petitioner’s alleged first violation of N.J.S.A.
State of New Jersey
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 19079-25
2
18A:39-28, et seq., in leaving a child on a school bus assigned to her on October 6, 2025.
The Office of Student Protection (OSP) determined that this was petitioner’s first offense
of this kind and accordingly imposed a penalty of a six-month of her “S” endorsement to
operate a school bus.
Petitioner filed her Petition of Appeal with the Department on October 15, 2025.
On October 28, 2025, the Department filed a motion to dismiss in lieu of an answer,
pursuant to N.J.A.C. 6A:3-1.10.1 The matter was transferred to the Office of
Administrative Law (OAL), where it was filed on October 31, 2025, as a contested case
under N.J.S.A. 52:14B-1 to -15 and N.J.S.A. 52:14F-1 to -13. On May 28, 2026, petitioner
filed a statement opposing dismissal of her matter. Having received no reply from the
Department to the petitioner’s response, the record closed on June 28, 2026.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Fisher is employed as a school bus driver for Maytav Bus Company, a school bus
company that services the Camden City School District. (See Report of a Student Left
Unattended on the School Bus, dated October 6, 2025, attached as Pet.’s Exhibit A.) On
October 6, 2025, it was alleged that the driver failed to perform a thorough check of the
bus after dropping off the students at Mastery KAPS and proceeded to the next route.
The student was never left unattended and was found approximately twenty minutes later
while the bus was in route to its next route. The school and district were promptly notified
and the student was brought to school. Petitioner claims that after she unloaded her
passengers, she did look in her passenger mirror, and that her aide mistakenly “told her
that the bus was clear” and that she “believed her because they worked together on the
same bus for about two years.” Petitioner calls the incident a first-time mistake and
assures that she will make sure it never happens again.
1 The Department filed a Motion to Dismiss in Lieu of an Answer with the Commissioner of Education under
N.J.A.C. 6A:3-1.10.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 19079-25
3
LEGAL ANALYSIS
The School Bus Safety Act, N.J.S.A. 18A:39-26 to -33, requires that the school-
bus driver “shall visually inspect the school bus to which he is assigned at the end of the
transportation route to determine that no pupil has been left on the bus.” N.J.S.A. 18A:39-
28. A violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:39-28 results in a mandatory penalty. N.J.S.A. 18A:39-
29. The statute dictates that “[i]n the event that, after notice and opportunity to be heard,
a school bus driver is found to have left a pupil on the school bus at the end of his route,
his school bus endorsement shall be: (a) suspended for six months, for a first offense
. . . .” N.J.S.A. 18A:39-29(a).
The issue in this case is whether the Department established by a preponderance
of the credible evidence that Fisher failed to comply with the statutory requirement that
the driver “shall visually inspect the school bus to which he is assigned at the end of the
transportation route to determine that no pupil has been left on the bus.” N.J.S.A. 18A:39-
28. Fisher has admitted only that she did look in her passenger mirror, but there is no
allegation that she did visually inspect the bus when she ended her transportation route.
She claims only that her aide mistakenly “told her that the bus was clear” and that she
“believed her because they worked together on the same bus for about two years.”
The statute is unambiguous in its requirement that the driver visually inspect the
bus, and Fisher did not do so, in violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:39-28. Since Fisher failed to
do so, she violated N.J.S.A. 18A: 39-28. Fisher’s attempt to deflect blame on her aide is
not relevant. The statute specifically requires drivers, not assistants or aides, to perform
the inspection. N.J.S.A. 18A:39-28. As such, Fisher’s statement regarding the aide is
both an admission that the student was left on the bus, and that she failed to perform a
final inspection that day, in violation of N.J.S.A. 18A:39-28. Because of the safety
implication of such a violation, a mandatory penalty exists in the event that the OSP
determines that a child was indeed left behind. Garner v. N.J. Dep’t of Educ., Crim. Hist.
Rev. Unit, 2009 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 173 (April 3, 2009), adopted, Comm’r (May 1, 2009),
https://www.nj.gov/education/legal/. Thus, “[i]n the event that . . . a school bus driver is
found to have left a pupil on the school bus . . . , his school bus endorsement shall be:
(a) suspended for six months, for a first offense . . . .” N.J.S.A. 18A:39-29(a).

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 19079-25
4
Here, since Fisher was in clear violation of the statute, the penalty imposed is
mandatory, and there is no discretion to impose anything less than a six-month
suspension of her “S” endorsement. Where the violation has been established, no
circumstances of the event or of the driver may be considered in determining the penalty.
Garner, 2009 N.J. AGEN LEXIS 173 at *5–6.
Under N.J.A.C. 6A:3-1.10, the Commissioner may dismiss a petition of appeal if it
fails to advance a cause of action even if the petitioner’s factual allegations are accepted
as true. The standard governing a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim in the
administrative context is identical to that governing a similar motion in the Superior Court.
Compare N.J.A.C. 6A:3-1.10 with Rule 4:6-2(e); see also Sloan ex rel. Sloan v. Klagholtz,
342 N.J. Super. 385, 393-94 (App. Div. 2001). Under that standard, the inquiry is “limited
to examining the legal sufficiency of the facts alleged on the face of the complaint.”
Printing Mart-Morristown v. Sharp Elecs. Corp., 116 N.J. 739, 746 (1989) (internal citation
omitted). A plaintiff is required to plead the facts and give detail of a cause of action. Id.
at 768. As such, “[a] complaint may be dismissed for failure to state a claim if it fails to
articulate a legal basis entitling plaintiff to relief.” Hoffman v. Hampshire Labs, Inc., 405
N.J. Super. 105, 112 (App. Div. 2009) (quoting Sickles v. Cabot Corp., 379 N.J. Super
100, 106 (App. Div. 2005)). If the complaint states no basis for legal relief, and discovery
would not supply one, dismissal is the appropriate remedy. Banco Popular, 184 N.J. at
166.
I CONCLUDE that the evidence presented by the parties does not establish any
material facts in dispute. Given the limited facts that must be established to support a
violation of the duty imposed by the Legislature on a school-bus driver to properly inspect
the bus at the end of a route to assure that no child is left on the bus, the arguments
offered by the Department amply support dismissal in its favor. And given the mandatory
nature of the penalty for a first-time violator of the mandate, a six-month suspension is
the only outcome where the violation is proven. N.J.S.A. 18A:39-29(b). The
Department’s motion for dismissal must be GRANTED.

OAL DKT. NO. EDU 19079-25
5
ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the Department’s motion for dismissal is hereby
GRANTED, and it is further ORDERED that the petitioner’s “S” endorsement shall be
suspended for a period of six months.
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. Exceptions may be filed by email to
ControversiesDisputesFilings@doe.nj.gov or by mail to Office of Controversies
and Disputes, 100 Riverview Plaza, 4th Floor, PO Box 500, Trenton, New Jersey
08625-0500. A copy of any exceptions must be sent to the judge and to the other parties.
August 24, 2026
DATE EDWARD J. DELANOY, JR. ALAJ
Date Received at Agency:
Date Mailed to Parties:
EJD/cb