Gillespie v. Board of Educ. of North Little Rock School Dist., No. One of Pulaski County, 82-1040
| Decision Date | 08 November 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 82-1040,82-1040 |
| Parties | 7 Ed. Law Rep. 488 Barbara GILLESPIE, Appellant, v. The BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, NUMBER ONE OF PULASKI COUNTY, Mary A. Gosser As President and Representative said Board; and George Miller, Superintendent of Schools of said School District, Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Robert V. Light, Little Rock, Ark., for appellees.
John W. Walker, Little Rock, Ark., for appellant.
Before HEANEY, Circuit Judge, and STEPHENSON and HENLEY, Senior Circuit Judges.
Plaintiff-appellant Barbara Gillespie appeals from the district court's 1 conclusion that appellee North Little Rock School District (School District) substantially complied with the notice provisions of Ark.Stat.Ann. Sec. 80-1304(b) (1980). We affirm the district court, 528 F.Supp. 433.
Gillespie, a certified guidance counselor, applied for and received a position as one of the two guidance counselors at Ridgeroad Junior High School for the 1979-80 school year, commencing her employment October 3, 1979. After starting work, she notified her principal, John Mears, that she was pregnant and would require maternity leave. The School District granted Gillespie maternity leave and she was on leave from January 11, 1980 to March 5, 1980.
Approximately one month after she returned from her maternity leave, Gillespie was informed by Mears that declining enrollment had forced the School District to abolish her position as guidance counselor for the 1980-81 school year. One week later, on April 10, 1980, Gillespie and her husband met with John Brooks, director of secondary education. Brooks also told Gillespie that one counselor position at her school would have to be eliminated because of the decline in student enrollment. However, Brooks assured Gillespie that she would be reassigned as a classroom teacher for the 1980-81 school year. In a letter to Brooks dated April 21, 1980, Gillespie confirmed her conversations with Brooks and Mears. She stated that she understood that Ridgeroad did not need her as a counselor but that she would have an assignment for the 1980-81 year. She further emphasized that she would like a counseling position when one became available in any school in the district.
Because of a computer programming error, Gillespie received a counseling position contract for the 1980-81 school year dated May 23, 1980. Although she was surprised to receive the counseling contract, Gillespie immediately executed the contract and returned it to the School District. When she told Mears about the document, he told her it was a mistake and advised her to talk to Doyle Crownover, the assistant superintendent for administration. Gillespie declined to do so.
As soon as Crownover became aware of the mistake, he sent Gillespie a letter dated May 27, 1980. The letter explained that a computer data error had caused her to receive an erroneous contract for counseling. Crownover enclosed a classroom teacher contract dated May 27, 1980, which he requested Gillespie execute and return. On June 6, 1980, Crownover visited Gillespie's office at Ridgeroad to discuss the contract mixup with her. He again explained that the issuance of a counseling contract had been a computer error and he again asked Gillespie to sign and return the teaching contract. Gillespie responded that she wanted to think about it and that she would contact him. Later that day she wrote Crownover a letter stating:
In a letter dated June 16, 1980, the School District's attorney wrote Gillespie. He enclosed a contract for a position as a secondary teacher and urged her to sign and return it. Gillespie did not respond to the letter.
Mr. George Miller, superintendent of schools, wrote Gillespie on June 26, 1980. His letter stated that he would recommend that the school board terminate any existing contractual relationship with Gillespie because she had attempted to take advantage of the computer error in her contract preparation. In a letter dated July 25, 1980, Miller informed Gillespie that the board had indeed voted to terminate any contractual relationship with her.
Gillespie filed a complaint in the Eastern District of Arkansas alleging sex discrimination, violations of her First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment rights and a violation of the notice provisions of Ark.Stat.Ann. Sec. 80-1304(b) (1980). That statute requires, subject to certain exceptions, that a school district give written notice to a teacher of its intent not to renew a teaching contract on the same terms and conditions as the immediately preceding teaching contract. After a two-day trial to the district court, the court entered judgment for the defendants.
Gillespie has not appealed any of her federal claims but instead has limited her appeal to her pendent state claim based on Ark.Stat.Ann. Sec. 80-1304(b) (1980). That statute provides:
Every contract of employment hereafter made between a teacher and a board of school directors shall be renewed in writing on the same terms and for the same salary, unless increased or decreased by law, for the school year next succeeding the date of termination fixed therein, which renewal may be made by indorsement on the existing contract instrument; unless during the period of such contract or within ten (10) days after the termination of said school term, the teacher shall be notified by the school board in writing delivered in person or mailed to him or her at last and usual known address by registered mail that such contract will not be renewed for such succeeding year, or unless the teacher during the period of the contract or within ten (10) days after close of school shall deliver or mail by registered mail to such board his or her written resignation as such teacher, or unless such contract is superseded by another contract between the parties.
Ark.Stat.Ann. Sec. 80-1304(b) (1980) (emphasis added). Gillespie argues that she did not receive written notice during the time period required by...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Independent Federation of Flight Attendants v. TWA
... ... period scheduled by the National Mediation Board at the conclusion of contract negotiations. 45 ... potential allies and was perceived to have little economic clout. The more diabolical alternatives ... Chicago, Rock Island & Pac. R.R. Co. v. Switchmen's Union, 292 ... Gillespie v. Bd. of Ed. of North Little Rock, 528 F.Supp ... were filled by employees still in training school at the end of the strike. The Court of Appeals ... ...
-
Love v. Smackover School Dist.
... ... 2] Marcia Barnes, Clayton R. Blackstock, Little Rock, for Appellant ... W. Paul ... Russell Johnson wrote a memo to the school board indicating the need to hire a "half-time, ... In April of 1994, she filed suit in Union County Circuit Court. She alleged that, because she had ... § 6-17-1503 (Repl.1993); Hamilton v. Pulaski County Sp. Sch. Dist., 321 Ark. 261, 900 S.W.2d ... See Gillespie v. Board of Education of North Little Rock, 528 ... ...
-
Maddox v. St. Paul School Dist., CA
... ... , Mitchell & Roachell by Marcia Barnes, Little Rock, for appellant ... W.Q ... Izard County Board of Educators v. Violet Hill School ... Gillespie v. Board of Education of North Little Rock, 528 ... ...