City of Rawlins v. Schofield
| Decision Date | 24 August 2022 |
| Docket Number | S-21-0278 |
| Citation | 2022 WY 103 |
| Parties | CITY OF RAWLINS, Appellant (Respondent), v. STEPHANIE SCHOFIELD, Appellee (Petitioner). |
| Court | Wyoming Supreme Court |
Appeal from the District Court of Carbon County The Honorable Dawnessa A. Snyder, Judge
Representing Appellant: Bradley T. Cave, Holland &Hart LLP, Cheyenne, Wyoming. Argument by Mr. Cave.
Representing Appellee: Robert C. Jarosh and Erin E. Berry Hirst Applegate, LLP, Cheyenne, Wyoming. Argument by Ms Berry.
Before FOX, C.J., and KAUTZ, BOOMGAARDEN, GRAY, and FENN, JJ.
[¶1] Stephanie Schofield challenged her termination from the City of Rawlins Fire Department (Fire Department). The district court determined that the procedures leading to her dismissal violated Ms. Schofield's right to due process and reversed the Rawlins Fire Department Civil Service Commission's (Commission) decision terminating her employment. The district court ordered Ms. Schofield be reinstated with back pay. We find the contested case hearing afforded Ms. Schofield due process, and the Commission's decision was supported by substantial evidence in accordance with law. We reverse the district court and affirm the decision of the Commission.
[¶2] The issues are: 1. Was Ms. Schofield afforded due process prior to her discharge by the Commission?
2. Was the Commission's decision supported by substantial evidence and not arbitrary or capricious?
[¶3] Ms. Schofield joined the Rawlins Fire Department as a volunteer in 2007, became a paid staff member in 2010, and was promoted to shift captain in 2016. In the early morning hours of May 16, 2020, 911 dispatcher Karigan Gates received a call from citizen DM seeking a "lift assist." Ms Gates was familiar with DM as she had spoken with her more than fifty times in her capacity as a dispatcher. DM is in a wheelchair and occasionally has difficulty speaking but given time, can communicate. On receiving DM's call, Ms. Gates called Fire Station One to initiate a response to DM's request. Ms. Schofield, who was nearing the end of a twenty-four-hour shift and had been asleep for several hours, took the call.[1] After Ms. Gates relayed the information, Ms. Schofield replied, "F***in [DM], G*d d*mn it." Ms. Schofield and Fire Engineer Paul Hardy then drove to DM's home. There, they discovered that the control stick of DM's wheelchair had gotten stuck underneath her kitchen countertop. After freeing her, they returned to the station.
[¶4] Three days later, on May 19, 2020, Ms. Gates received another late night 911 call from DM asking for a lift assist. Ms. Gates called Fire Station One and Ms. Schofield, asleep at the end of her shift, answered the call. On learning that the call for assistance was from DM, Ms. Schofield said, "f***in [DM]." "I'm going to kick her a**." Ms. Gates, feeling uncomfortable but not believing Ms. Schofield was intending to act on her comments, laughed. When Ms. Schofield and Fire Engineer Hardy arrived at DM's residence, they found her in her wheelchair in the bedroom. The impetus for her 911 call was that her catheter had disconnected. After reconnecting the catheter and returning to the station, Ms. Schofield called Ms. Gates. She explained the reason behind DM's call and told Ms. Gates that she scolded DM. Ms. Schofield disclosed that she told DM, "[W]e're coming here thinking that this is an emergency." "This isn't an emergency." "You can't [tell us] lift assist when it's not [an emergency]." Ms. Schofield told Ms. Gates that she thought she had made DM "feel bad" and "she may complain." Fire Engineer Hardy testified he was "surprised" because "[he] didn't think [Ms.] Schofield would have talked to citizen DM that way."
[¶5] Ms. Gates did not report the calls to her supervisor or anyone else. However, as a separate matter, she had emailed her supervisor requesting a recording of a call that had come in just after Ms. Gates' first call to Ms. Schofield.[2] In preparing to record that call, the supervisor heard the exchange between Ms. Gates and Ms. Schofield. The supervisor reported the call to the Rawlins chief of police. The next day, the Rawlins chief of police asked Battalion Chief Allen Robinson, Ms. Schofield's direct supervisor,[3] to stop by dispatch. When he arrived, the 911 supervisor played the May 19, 2020 recorded call between Ms. Gates and Ms. Schofield. Battalion Chief Robinson stated his He asked for a transcript of the call which he read before returning to the station. On his return, he reread the transcript of the call, and then emailed the City of Rawlins (the City) interim city manager, Dustin Ziebold, to request a meeting.
[¶6] The next day, he met with Mr. Ziebold and played the May 19, 2020 recording. Mr. Ziebold asked Battalion Chief Robinson to procure recordings and transcripts of the May 16 dispatch call regarding DM, the May 19 dispatch call, and the May 19 follow-up call from Ms. Schofield to Ms. Gates. Mr. Ziebold reviewed the transcripts of the dispatch calls to Ms. Schofield and the transcript of the follow-up call from Ms. Schofield to Ms. Gates. He examined Ms. Schofield's disciplinary record as well. According to Mr. Ziebold, "in the end, the audio of the call was the pertinent piece of information, the tone, the tone that was used in that call." After several meetings between Battalion Chief Robinson and Mr. Ziebold, Battalion Chief Robinson recommended that the appropriate disciplinary action should be termination. Mr. Ziebold agreed.
[¶7] No one discussed the situation with Ms. Schofield until May 27, 2020. On that day while she was working her shift, Battalion Chief Robinson told her they needed to go for a ride. He provided no explanation. He drove Ms. Schofield to City Hall and a few minutes after they arrived, the city clerk escorted them to Mr. Ziebold's office.[4] Mr. Ziebold gave Ms. Schofield three documents-a transcript of the May 19 dispatch call, a resignation letter, and a termination letter. He asked her to read the transcript. When she finished, he told her, "the conduct on the call will not be tolerated." Mr. Ziebold informed Ms. Schofield that she could resign at once or her employment would be terminated immediately. The termination letter stated:
[¶8] Ms. Schofield refused to sign the resignation letter and was terminated. She requested a hearing. She was instructed on how to file a hearing request with the Commission and did so the same day. On June 5, 2020, Ms. Schofield's counsel sent a letter to the Commission requesting that Ms. Schofield be "reinstated immediately to her previous position with the City of Rawlins, and provided full back pay[.]" Ms. Schofield's counsel asserted that her termination was illegal and contrary to Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 15-5-112(b) ("no person may be discharged or reduced in pay or rank without consent of the commission after a hearing"). Counsel maintained the action was likewise contrary to the Commission's Rule 12.2 which similarly requires the decision for termination or reduction in pay be made by the Commission and then enforced by the city manager.
[¶9] On June 8, 2020, Mr. Ziebold wrote to the Commission and Ms. Schofield. In the letter, he recognized the validity of the points made by Ms. Schofield's counsel on the limits of his authority, and he reinstated Ms. Schofield with back pay. The letter formally requested that the Commission consider dismissal of Ms. Schofield and conduct an investigation and hearing. The letter identified Ms. Schofield's misconduct during the dispatch calls as the basis for the termination request. It also listed the Commission and personnel rules Ms. Schofield was alleged to have violated and raised an additional basis for termination which had not been previously raised or made known to Ms. Schofield- two past disciplinary actions "pertinent to whether Ms. Schofield should be discharged for cause to promote the efficiency of the service[.]" The two prior disciplinary actions were described as follows:
[¶10] On June 11, 2020, the Commission appointed a hearing officer and directed him to investigate the allegations with the investigation to include a contested case hearing pursuant to Commission Rule 12.2. On June 19, 2020, the hearing officer issued a Notice of Investigation, after which the "Commission . . . shall determine whether the reason for discharge is sufficient and established." Ms. Schofield requested that the matter go directly to a hearing. The Amended Notice of Hearing ordered each party to serve...
To continue reading
Request your trial