Bridgewater-Raritan Educ. Ass'n ex rel. Manzur v. Bd. of Educ. of the Bridgewater-Raritan Sch. Dist.

• Decision Date: 06 May 2015
• Docket Number: A-85 September Term 2013, 073873.
• Citation: 221 N.J. 349,113 A.3d 764
• Parties: BRIDGEWATER–RARITAN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION on behalf of Tamara Manzur, Carol O'Neil and Maggie Cassidy, Petitioners–Appellants, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the BRIDGEWATER–RARITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT, SOMERSET COUNTY, Respondent–Respondent.
• Court: New Jersey Supreme Court

221 N.J. 349

113 A.3d 764

BRIDGEWATER–RARITAN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION on behalf of Tamara Manzur, Carol O'Neil and Maggie Cassidy, Petitioners–Appellants

v.BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the BRIDGEWATER–RARITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT, SOMERSET COUNTY, Respondent–Respondent.

A-85 September Term 2013, 073873.

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Argued March 3, 2015.

Decided May 6, 2015.

William P. Hannan, II, argued the cause for appellants (Oxfeld Cohen, attorneys; Mr. Hannan and Sanford R. Oxfeld, Newark, of counsel and on the brief).

Stephen J. Edelstein argued the cause for respondent Bridgewater–Raritan Regional Board of Education (Schwartz Simon Edelstein & Celso, attorneys; Nicholas Celso, III, of counsel, Mr. Celso and Douglas M. Silvestro, Whippany, on the brief).

Donna S. Arons, Deputy Attorney General, appeared on behalf of respondent New Jersey Commissioner of Education (John J. Hoffman, Acting Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney; Lewis A. Scheindlin, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Frederick H. Wu, Deputy Attorney General, on letter in lieu of brief).

Opinion

Justice LaVECCHIA delivered the opinion of the Court.

Teachers ordinarily obtain tenure in a position when they serve for any of the time periods set forth in N.J.S.A. 18A:28–5. The Legislature created an exception to that general rule in N.J.S.A. 18A:16–1.1. Under that exception, a board of education may designate a person to act in the place of an officer or employee during the officer's or employee's absence, disability, or disqualification and no person so designated as a replacement shall acquire tenure based on such temporary service. Ibid. In this appeal, the Court is asked to decide whether three teachers employed by the Board of Education of the Bridgewater–Raritan School District (Board) appropriately were denied tenure as a matter of law or equity under circumstances calling into question the interplay of those two statutes. The Appellate Division judgment under review affirmed the Commissioner of Education's dismissal of the action brought on behalf of the three teachers. We now affirm in part and reverse in part.

I.

A.

Petitioner Bridgewater–Raritan Education Association (Association) appealed on behalf of the teachers after they were notified by the Board that their contracts would not be renewed. All three teachers (1) had been told by high-level school district administrators—including the district's superintendent of schools—that their time working as a replacement teacher counted toward the acquisition of tenure, (2) had worked for the school district for at least three full school years, and (3) had worked for at least one full school year as a replacement teacher. Their individual circumstances are summarized below.¹

Tamara Manzur initially was hired by the school district in September 2006 as a replacement teacher for a full-time sixth-grade teacher who was commencing parental leave. She was informed that the job was for the entire school year (from September 2006 to June 2007), and was told by the school's principal that the job would count toward acquisition of tenure. Upon Manzur's inquiry, the district's superintendent of schools, Dr. Michael Schilder, confirmed to her, at a later date, that time spent replacing a teacher on maternity leave counted toward tenure acquisition. Manzur received a copy of her 2006–07 school-year contract in January 2007.

Manzur was rehired as a sixth-grade teacher for the 2007–08 school year; however, there is no evidence in this record that she was informed that she was replacing another teacher nor was she so notified in her contract or other written materials. There appears in this record no dispute that she taught in the same classroom as she did in the 2006–07 school year. Manzur was rehired for the same position for the 2008–09 school year, but she was notified that she was being transferred to a fifth-grade teaching position prior to the beginning of the school year. Manzur was rehired for the 2009–10 school year again as a fifth-grade teacher.

In a September 2009 letter, Schilder informed Manzur that pursuant to the law governing teacher tenure, “only time worked in a permanent position can be counted toward” tenure and that time worked in a position while covering another teacher's absence from that position does not count toward tenure. Schilder's letter further informed Manzur that her “tenure earning start date” was September 1, 2008, and that she would receive tenure on September 2, 2011. The letter stated, “[s]ince you were a leave replacement for Concetta Fischer from 1/2/07 to 6/30/07, this time does not count toward tenure.” No reference was made to the 2007–08 school year for which Manzur was rehired as a sixth-grade teacher. Manzur asserts that she was not told she was filling in for another teacher for the 2007–08 school year.

After being rehired as a fifth-grade teacher for the 2010–11 school year, Manzur was informed by letter dated April 27, 2011, that the school district would not be renewing her contract. Manzur completed her service in June 2011, less than three months short of the three years that she would have needed in order to secure tenured status.

Carol O'Neil was hired by the district in March 2007 as a replacement for a fourth-grade teacher who was going on maternity leave. The school's principal told O'Neil that her service as a replacement teacher through the end of the school year would not count toward tenure. O'Neil was not provided a contract for the period of March 2007 to June 2007.

O'Neil was rehired as a fourth-grade teacher for the 2007–08 school year and was assured by the school's principal that, because she would work under a contract for the entire year, her service for that period would count toward attaining tenure. Her contract for that school year did not state that she was serving as a replacement teacher; however, her evaluation for the 2007–08 school year, which was provided to her, reaffirmed that she worked as a replacement teacher. The 2007–08 evaluation, dated March 31, 2008, states: “Mrs. O'Neil joined our staff this year as a Grade 4 maternity leave replacement for Mrs. Karen Bauer.” O'Neil was rehired for the 2008–09 school year and again her 2008–09 evaluation, dated March 31, 2009, referred to her replacement status: “Mrs. O'Neil has been serving as a Grade 4 maternity leave replacement for Mrs. Karen Bauer.” She received contracts to teach for the 2009–10 and 2010–11 school years also, and “at all times” her principal openly stated O'Neil was on a tenure track.

O'Neil believed that she would acquire tenure at the beginning of the 2010–11 school year. However, like Manzur, O'Neil received a letter from Schilder in September 2009 informing O'Neil of her tenure-acquisition date. The letter stated that O'Neil would not receive tenure until September 2012 because she had served as a replacement teacher for the 2007–08 and 2008–09 school years. O'Neil received another letter on April 27, 2011, informing her that her contract would not be renewed.

Maggie Cassidy began working in the school district on September 1, 2007, as a replacement for a teacher on maternity leave. Cassidy had been serving as a replacement teacher in another district, where she had been informed that her time spent serving as a replacement did not count toward tenure. Seeking a tenure-track position, Cassidy specifically asked whether her position as a replacement teacher in the district would count toward the acquisition of tenure. Both her building supervisor and Schilder told her that the position would indeed count toward qualifying for tenure.

Cassidy was rehired for the same position in the 2008–09 school year, and she was hired to fill a different position at another school building for the 2009–10 school year. Cassidy's contracts made no reference to her being a replacement teacher or indicated that her service under those contracts would not count toward tenure.

Like Manzur and O'Neil, Schilder informed Cassidy by letter that her 2007–08 employment would not count toward achieving tenure because Cassidy was serving as a replacement. The letter projected her tenure-acquisition date to be September 2, 2011. After being rehired for the 2010–11 school year, Cassidy's contract was not renewed for the 2011–12 school year.

Both Manzur and O'Neil aver that they would have sought work elsewhere had they known that service as a replacement teacher in the district did not count toward acquiring tenure. Similarly, Cassidy states that she would not have sought employment with the district if she had known that her replacement-teacher status was a bar to accruing time toward tenure.

B.

The Association filed a Petition of Appeal with the Commissioner on behalf of Manzur, O'Neil, and Cassidy, arguing that all three teachers were entitled to tenure. After the matter was transferred to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) as a contested case, the Board filed a motion for summary decision pursuant to N.J.A.C. 1:1–12.5 and N.J.A.C. 6A:3–1.12(b).

In opposing summary decision, the Association argued that the teachers were entitled to tenure under the principles of apparent authority and equitable estoppel, noting that they had been told by high-level administrators that replacement-teacher service counts toward tenure. The Association further contended that Manzur was entitled to tenure as a matter of law because Schilder's September 2009 letter—written after Manzur had worked the entire 2007–08 and 2008–09 school years—stated Manzur was “a leave replacement for Concetta Fischer from 1/2/07 to 6/30/07,” but made no reference to the 2007–08 school year. According to the Association, even if the administrators' representations that replacement teaching counted toward tenure are disregarded, Manzur's 2007–08, 2008–09, and 2009–10 teaching time rendered her tenured when she began work for the 2010–11 school year on September 2, 2010.

An administrative law judge (ALJ) assigned to hear the matter granted the...