Board of School Trustees of South Vermillion School Corp. v. Benetti, 1-985A216

• Decision Date: 21 May 1986
• Docket Number: No. 1-985A216,1-985A216
• Parties: 32 Ed. Law Rep. 242 BOARD OF SCHOOL TRUSTEES OF the SOUTH VERMILLION SCHOOL CORPORATION, Defendant- Appellant, v. Deborah A. BENETTI, Plaintiff-Appellee.
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court

Page 1098

492 N.E.2d 1098

32 Ed. Law Rep. 242

BOARD OF SCHOOL TRUSTEES OF the SOUTH VERMILLION SCHOOL

CORPORATION, Defendant- Appellant, v. Deborah A. BENETTI, Plaintiff-Appellee.

No. 1-985A216.

Court of Appeals of Indiana,

First District.

May 21, 1986.

William K. Steger, Bunger, Robertson, Kelley & Steger, Bloomington, James R. Bunch, Wallace, Campbell, Bunch, Shambach & Rennick, Covington, Joe E. Beardsley, II, Beardsley & Stengel, Clinton, for defendant-appellant.

Richard J. Darko, Robert R. Clark, Tabbert & Capehart, Indianapolis, Kipling N. White, White, White & Bray, Covington, for plaintiff-appellee.

RATLIFF, Judge.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

The Board of School Trustees of the South Vermillion School Corporation appeals the trial court's granting of a preliminary injunction enjoining the Board from refusing to recognize its teaching contract with Deborah A. Benetti until after resolution of the issues involved in a trial on the merits. To the extent that the trial court found Benetti had a valid teacher's contract we affirm but we reverse the preliminary injunction and remand to the trial court for further proceedings.

FACTS

Deborah A. Benetti (Benetti) was hired by the South Vermillion Community School Corporation (the Corporation) to teach elementary art during the 1983-84 school year. This contract was terminated by the Board of School Trustees (the Board) in December of 1983, when the Board decided Benetti was not properly licensed for the position. ¹ In April of 1984, Benetti filed suit challenging this action. That suit was proceeding through the discovery process in the Summer of 1985, when the events leading up to this appeal occurred.

On June 19, 1985, the corporation held its regular meeting of the Board with five of the seven members of the Board in attendance. The Vice-President of the Board, Charles Hendrix (Hendrix), made a motion to hire Benetti to fill a vacant elementary art teaching position. After apparently receiving the approval of the Board attorney regarding the validity of the motion, it was called to a vote and passed three to two. Usually, the Board's meetings followed an agenda setting forth the matters of the meeting which was circulated among Board members. While the possibility of re-hiring Benetti had been brought up at previous meetings, it was not on the agenda for the June 19, 1985 meeting.

Following the meeting, Hendrix went to Benetti's home, informed her of the Board's action, and instructed her to go to the corporation's office the following morning to sign an employment contract. On June 20, 1985, a Regular Teacher's Contract was signed by Benetti and by Hendrix and acting Superintendent Larry Vandeventer ² on behalf of the corporation.

After conferring with Board President Gary Dick, Vandeventer called a special meeting for June 27, 1985, to review the decision to hire Benetti. All seven of the Board members were present. On a vote of four to three, ³ the Board decided not to approve the re-hiring of Benetti. Although present, Benetti was not given any formal notice of the meeting or of the Board's intention to terminate her contract. In addition On July 26, 1985, Benetti filed a motion for a preliminary injunction. At a hearing on the motion Benetti testified that since the repudiation of her contract she had made thirteen applications and interviewed with numerous school corporations all with no positive response. Benetti stated that the damage to her reputation and the unfavorable publicity she received could be cured only by proving herself a "very good teacher." The trial court found that the contract executed by the parties complied with Indiana's statutory requirements. The court further noted that following repudiation, the Superintendent and screening committee had interviewed four candidates for the position and were ready to make a recommendation at the August meeting. Further, teachers in the school system were required to report for duty on August 26, 1985, with students starting the following day.

no testimony was taken nor were findings made regarding incompetency, immorality, insubordination, or any other just cause for terminating Benetti's contract, as provided for in the contract. Thereafter, on July 22, 1985, Benetti filed a supplemental complaint alleging the corporation breached the subsequent Regular Teacher's Contract executed on June 20, 1985.

The trial court found Benetti to be a competent and qualified teacher and determined that damage to her teaching reputation was unmeasurable solely in monetary terms, thereby making a remedy at law inadequate. Noting that Benetti had demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of succeeding at trial, that the injury to her outweighed the harm an injunction would have on the Board, that the public interest would not be disserved by an injunction, and that Benetti's teaching reputation might suffer irreparable injury the trial court granted a preliminary injunction. ⁴ The injunction enjoined the Board from refusing to recognize the validity of Benetti's contract, employing anyone else to perform those duties during the 1985-86 school year, or taking any action that would interfere with Benetti's contractual rights. Thereafter the Board perfected this appeal.

ISSUES

1. Does Indiana law require that teachers' contracts be approved by a majority vote of a school corporation's entire governing body or merely the affirmative vote of a majority of a quorum which is present to transact business?

2. If the affirmative vote of a majority of a quorum which is present to transact business is all that is necessary, then did the trial court err in granting Benetti a preliminary injunction which, in essence, ordered the specific performance of her personal services contract?

DISCUSSION AND DECISION

Issue One

In determining whether a majority vote of the entire School Board is required or if a majority vote of a quorum present to transact business is all that is necessary, two statutory enactments must be analyzed. The Indiana General School Powers Act (General Powers Act) sets out the basic guidelines for the organization and effective administration of state school systems. Indiana Code Section 20-5-1-3 (Burns 1985 Repl.) sets forth various applicable definitions:

"(a) 'School corporation' shall mean any local public school corporation established under the laws of the state of Indiana, including but not limited to school cities, school towns, metropolitan school districts, consolidated school corporations, county school corporations, community school corporations and united school corporations, excluding, however, school townships.

"(b) "Governing body' shall mean the board [or] commission charged by law with the responsibility of administering the affairs of a school corporation, including but not limited to, a board of school commissioners, metropolitan board of education, board of school trustees or board of trustees; and 'member' shall mean a member of such governing body...."

This section further states:

"(h) 'Laws relating to the employment, contracting, compensation and discharge of teachers' shall refer to [Sections 20-6.1-1-2; 20-6.1-1-8; 20-6.1-3-2; 20-6.1-3-7; 20-6.1-4-1; 20-6.1-4-3; 20-6.1-4-4 et seq.; 20-6.1-5-1 et seq.; 20-6.1-6-1 et seq. ], and any other laws relating to such employment, contracting, compensation and discharge."

Hence, chapter six controls the employment and contracting of teachers. Gary Teachers Union v. School City of Gary (1975), 165 Ind.App. 314, 320, 332 N.E.2d 256, 260, trans. denied. According to Indiana Code section 20-6.1-4-3:

"(a) Each contract entered into by a teacher and a school corporation must:

1) Be in writing;

2) Be signed by both parties; and

3) Contain:

(A) The beginning date of the school term as determined annually by the school corporation;

(B) The number of days in the school term as determined annually by the school corporation;

(C) The total salary to be paid during the school year; and

(D) The number of salary payments to be made during the school year.

The contract may provide for the annual determination of the teacher's annual compensation by a local salary schedule, which schedule is considered a part of each contract. This salary schedule may be changed by the school corporation on or before May 1 of a year; the changes begin the next school year. However, each teacher affected by the changes shall be furnished with printed copies of the changed schedule within thirty days after its adoption.

Each contract is also governed by sections 1, 2, 3, 6(a), 6(b), 7, and 8 [20-6.1-5-1--20-6.1-5-3, 20-6.1-5-6(a), 20-6.1-5-6(b), 20-6.1-5-7, 20-6.1-5-8] of chapter 5 of this article.

(b) Each governing body shall provide the blank contract forms, carefully worded by the state superintendent, and shall have them signed. These contracts are public records open to inspection by the people of each school corporation.

(c) An action may be brought on a contract which conforms with subsections (a)(1), (a)(2) and (b) of this section."

This chapter also defines permanent ⁵ and semipermanent ⁶ teaching positions, provides their contract requirements, and specifies the manner in which these contracts may be cancelled. ⁷ Finally, chapter six provides for the contract rights of nonpermanent teachers, ⁸ those teachers not yet falling under the definition of permanent or semipermanent educators. Benetti's contract with the School Board placed her within the statutory classification of a nonpermanent teacher.

While chapter six controls the employment of teachers, it is silent with regard to what constitutes a quorum and what type of majority vote is necessary to approve the hiring of a teacher. Instead, the General Powers Act defines, in part, a quorum stating:

"Quorum. At a meeting of the governing body, a majority of the members shall constitute a quorum. No action may be taken unless a quorum is present. Except where a larger vote is required by...