Download
1 / 11
130 likes | 422 Views
Teacher as Exemplar: Criminal Activities ( School Law Cases and Concepts, p. 251 - 256). Michelle Duke MED 6490 February 9, 2010. Gillett v. Unified School Dist. No. 276, Supreme Court of Kansas, 1980, 605 P.2d.105.
E N D
Teacher as Exemplar:Criminal Activities(School Law Cases and Concepts, p. 251 - 256) Michelle Duke MED 6490 February 9, 2010
Gillett v. Unified School Dist.No. 276, Supreme Court of Kansas, 1980, 605 P.2d.105 • Jessie Mae Gillett was a tenured teacher who had been continuously employed by the Unified School District for seven years. • On March 11, 1977, the board notified Mrs. Gillett that they would not be renewing her contract, due to the existence of criminal charges of shoplifting pending against her in Hastings, Nebraska in 1976. • Mrs. Gillett promptly filed a request for a due process hearing on the matter.
Facts • On May 5, 1977 the board served Mrs. Gillett with a notice that contained a supplemental list of reasons for non-renewal of her contract: • Inability to properly handle school funds • Excessive absences from teaching school duties for allegedly being ill • Improper use of sick leave • Physical and mental instability • Loss of community, student, and school board respect for this teacher
First Holding • The board held to its original decision not to renew her contract. • Mrs. Gillett appealed the school board’s decision to the district court. • The district court entered judgment in favor of Mrs. Gillett, ordering her reinstated with back pay.
Issue • Whether the district court erred in holding that the school board had failed to present substantial evidence to support its reason for non-renewal. • Original cause (shoplifting) was undisputed. In fact, there was an earlier incident in 1973. • Mrs. Gillett’s defense, at the time, was that she was not criminally responsible due to a mental condition • Dr. Peters testified that, although she was not mentally ill, she suffered from altered states of consciousness resulting from sensitive reactions to a wide variety of foods. During these attacks her judgment was adversely affected, therefore she was not responsible for her actions. Such episodes could (and did) come up at any time, including classroom hours.
At the time of the hearing, Mrs. Gillett was involved in an elimination diet, to determine the triggers. • There was testimony that Mrs. Gillett had been careless in keeping money from candy sales in her desk drawer, and failed to make daily deposits to the bank, as required by the school superintendent. However, no proof of any wrongdoing here. • The record is devoid of any misconduct regarding excessive absences. • The board made attempts to show loss of community, school, and student respect for the teacher.
Second Holding • The judgment of the district court must be reversed and the case remanded to the district court with directions to enter judgment in favor of the school board.
Legal Doctrine • The board’s action was taken in good faith, and was not arbitrary, irrational, unreasonable, or irrelevant to maintaining an efficient school system • Not a single witness testified as to any contributions Mrs. Gillett was making to the educational program of the school district.
Kimble v. Worth County R-Ill Board of Education, 669 S.W. 2d.949 (Mo. Ct. App. 1984) • Teacher’s contract terminated for stealing a teapot that was a prop in a school play, $20 from a basketball game’s receipts, and a set of the school’s books. • Dubuclet v. Home Insurance Company, 660 So.2d 67 (La. Ct. App. 1995) • A teacher who had pled guilty to possession of marijuana and cocaine in a criminal proceeding was not reinstated to his teaching position after his criminal record had been expunged. The expungement did not erase the fact that he had committed the act, nor did it erase the moral turpitude of the teacher’s conduct.
Kari v. Jefferson county School District,852 P.2d 235 (Or. Ct. App. 1993) • Failure to take appropriate measures in response to her husband’s use of the family home for growing and selling marijuana was not held to be a “neglect of duty” on a teacher’s part, and her reinstatement by the Oregon Fair Dismissal Appeal Board was upheld.
Significance: Torts - civil, non-contractual responsibilities that individuals in society owe to one another • Intentional Torts • Criminal behavior or deliberate act against another • Defamation • Intentional Emotional Stress • Professional or job incompetency • Unintentional Torts • An act or omission that causes physical or psychological harm perpetrated by someone who fails to exercise the degree of reasonable care necessary under the circumstances.
