 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Bertolini v. Whitehall City School District Board of Education9/26/2000
manner after being so advised.
Accordingly, after a complete review of the record, which includes the exhibits introduced at appellant's hearing, the transcripts of that hearing, the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the referee, and the board's resolution to terminate appellant's contract, we find that the trial court abused its discretion in holding that " ppellant's conduct constituted serious enough matters to justify the termination for immorality and other good and just cause." We agree with the referee's detailed analysis of the evidence and conclusions that the board "failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that [appellant] was guilty of immorality" and that appellant "was guilty of willful and persistent violations of reasonable regulations."
We note that the present case should also be viewed against other cases involving teachers and supervisors who appeal their contract terminations pursuant to R.C. 3319.16. A review of cases in which the appellate court affirmed a school board's decision to terminate a school employee shows that the teacher's behavior had or could have had a serious affect on the school system. For example, many of the cases involved inappropriate sexual relations between faculty and students. Other cases involved instances in which a teacher had been convicted of a serious criminal offense. Some of the cases involved direct refusals by teachers to follow board guidelines. In other cases, the actions of a teacher could have caused serious harm to a student. In the present case, appellant's actions did not involve any students. Appellant was not convicted of a criminal offense, and his actions were not harmful to any students. The only evidence presented of the immorality contemplated by R.C. 3319.16 was the fact that appellant was initially dishonest with Dr. Crawford when he denied having an affair with Woods when he was first asked about it prior to February 21, 1998.
Additionally, a review of cases where an appellate court has reversed the decision of a board to terminate a teacher helps to illustrate the severity of the conduct needed to justify a termination pursuant to R.C. 3319.16. In James v. Trumbull Co. Bd. of Edn. (1995), 105 Ohio App.3d 392, the board's decision to terminate a teacher for employing controversial teaching techniques to handicapped children was reversed because the appellate court found that the evidence did not support the board's decision. The appellate court agreed with the trial court's findings that the board failed to produce any written or verbal policy allegedly violated by the teacher, or cite a single directive or instruction not followed by the teacher. Id. at 397. The trial court also found that after the board raised its concerns with the teacher, the teacher "was never given the opportunity to conform her behavior to [the board's] expectations." Id.
In Cephus v. Dayton Bd. of Edn. (Oct. 27, 1993), Montgomery App. No. 13884, unreported, jurisdictional motion overruled (1994), 69 Ohio St.3d 1410, the appellate court reversed a board's decision to terminate a teacher because the teacher failed to take a mental examination. The appellate court found that the teacher's request that the instructions for the mental examination be put in writing was reasonable. The appellate court also noted that had the teacher "received the written instructions of January 16, 1992 and not complied with the requests contained therein, then clearly the Board would have been justified in terminating her."
In Katz v. Maple Heights City School District Bd. of Edn. (1993), 87 Ohio App.3d 256, the appellate court found the board's decision to terminate a teacher for falsifying sick time was n
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Ohio Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|