What is the burden of proving that an assistant principal falls within the protection of the rule of common law?

Even so, the burden of proving that the petitioner falls within the protection of the rule is on the petitioner (Grossman v. Rankin, 43 N.Y.2d 493, 402 N.Y.S.2d 373, 373 N.E.2d 267; Haberman v. Codd, 48 A.D.2d 505, 370 N.Y.S.2d 118). The petitioner has clearly met that burden. The petitioner proved without contradiction, that she has performed and it was her duty to perform every duty now required to be performed by the assistant principal--elementary level. While the precise degree of similarity cannot be accurately ascertained it is clear that whether one's base of analysis is quantitative or qualitative the degree of similarity between the two positions is high.