Crenshaw v. Erskine Coll.

• Citation: 850 S.E.2d 1,432 S.C. 1
• Decision Date: 09 September 2020
• Docket Number: Appellate Case No. 2018-001926,Opinion No. 27993
• Parties: William CRENSHAW, Respondent, v. ERSKINE COLLEGE and David A. Norman, Petitioners.
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

432 S.C. 1

850 S.E.2d 1

William CRENSHAW, Respondent,

v.ERSKINE COLLEGE and David A. Norman, Petitioners.

Appellate Case No. 2018-001926

Opinion No. 27993

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

Heard January 15, 2020

Filed September 9, 2020

Rehearing Denied November 30, 2020

Thomas H. Keim Jr., Ford & Harrison, LLP, of Spartanburg, for Petitioners.

E. Charles Grose Jr., Grose Law Firm; Robert J. Tinsley Sr., and Robert Jamison Tinsley Jr., Tinsley & Tinsley, P.C., all of Greenwood, for Respondent.

JUSTICE FEW :

William Crenshaw—a tenured professor of English at Erskine College—brought this lawsuit claiming he was wrongfully fired. An Abbeville County jury found in favor of Dr. Crenshaw and awarded him $600,000. We hold the trial court properly granted Erskine's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) because—as a matter of law—Erskine did not breach its contract with Dr. Crenshaw.

I. Facts and Procedural History

William Crenshaw, Ph.D. began teaching at Erskine College in Due West, South Carolina, in 1976. Erskine granted him tenure in 1984. On the morning of Friday, September 24, 2010, Dr. Crenshaw was teaching a freshman seminar on critical thinking skills. He noticed one of the students was "nodding off ... like she was going to sleep." The other students in the class told Crenshaw the student fell during lacrosse practice earlier that morning and hit her head on both her lacrosse stick and the ground. Crenshaw—a former paramedic—administered what he called "the standard orientation test" EMS personnel give for "a suspected head injury

." Crenshaw determined the student needed medical attention, so he stepped out of the classroom and called Robyn Agnew—Vice President for Student Services—to arrange for an ambulance. When EMS arrived, paramedics removed the student from the classroom and put her into the ambulance.

When the class ended, Crenshaw noticed EMS was still on campus. He decided to approach the ambulance to "see how she's doing." The paramedics informed Crenshaw that the athletic trainers and the student's guardian told the student she could refuse to be transported in the ambulance. Crenshaw testified the student was upset and the paramedics requested his help to calm the student. Crenshaw then entered the ambulance where he discussed with the student whether she should refuse to be taken to the hospital. Later that day, the guardian informed the Academic Office she intended to file a complaint against Crenshaw claiming Crenshaw pushed her out of the way as he entered the ambulance. The Due West Police Chief, who responded to the scene "in reference to an assault," testified the guardian "was very irate" and "we had to calm her down." He testified Crenshaw's "behavior was normal" and he did not "do anything out of line."

Over the weekend, Crenshaw and Adam Weyer—Erskine's head athletic trainer—engaged in a heated email exchange. Weyer accused Crenshaw of violating an Erskine student athlete "protocol" that directs faculty members to call athletic trainers before calling for EMS. Crenshaw responded that Erskine's " ‘normal protocol,’ as you call it, is certainly different from the nationwide emergency medical protocols for blunt closed head trauma

. Why is that?" Crenshaw also wrote, "The fact that you or your people were attempting to stop emergency transport when definitive diagnosis is beyond your capability is chilling, dangerous, and a lawsuit waiting to happen." Finally, Crenshaw wrote, "When you endanger students, you bet I'm going to question the way you do your job." In these emails, Crenshaw repeatedly asked for a copy of the protocol Weyer said he violated, but apparently was never given one.

The next week, three Erskine officials filed grievances against Crenshaw for his conduct on September 24 and over the weekend. The procedure for handling grievances of this sort is set forth in "The College Faculty Manual." The August 31, 2009 version of the Faculty Manual comprises sixty-five pages and an appendix of forms addressing a wide variety of subjects affecting faculty, other employees, and students. The section entitled "Faculty Committees" provides for grievances to be forwarded to the Grievance Committee, a "standing" committee consisting of six faculty members who hold no administrative position. The Faculty Manual¹ provides the committee will "act as a mediator," and "determine whether basic rights, such as academic freedom, have been respected."

The committee met, but the chairman reported they were unable to assist in resolving the dispute.

After an effort to mediate the grievances by a dean was unsuccessful because the Erskine officials who filed them refused to participate, Dr. David Norman—President of Erskine College—appointed professors to an ad hoc faculty committee—as provided for in the Faculty Manual—to interview those involved and advise him "regarding the nature and extent of relevant culpability." Crenshaw met with this committee in December, and categorically denied all allegations against him. He questioned the committee's procedures and accused the members of "ad hoc justice, justice on the fly." When the members asked a question about a specific allegation, Crenshaw responded by asking for evidence to support the allegation. He accused the committee of going on "fishing expeditions" and violating his "due process."

He also told the committee, "You people are putting yourselves in harm's way," and "you are [about] to put yourselves in jeopardy." Several members of the ad hoc committee interpreted Crenshaw's comments as threatening. One of the members recused himself because he felt threatened. In a letter to President Norman the same day as the committee meeting, the professor wrote,

I am very much a proponent of faculty self-governance and defending faculty rights, but the environment is so toxic, with pervasive bullying on the part of Dr. Crenshaw that I must recuse myself. I feel that I can no longer serve as a fair and impartial member of this committee due to ... the constant aggressive acts ... and threats of Dr. Crenshaw ... at this meeting today ...."

In early January 2011, the committee made its report to President Norman. The professor who wrote that he was recusing himself nevertheless signed the report, which said nothing about any threatening behavior. In concluding the report, the committee wrote, "At this time we believe that we can do no more to help resolve this situation. It is our opinion that faculty governance will not be successful in this case."

Erskine took no further action until August 2011. During the interval, many alumni publicly called for Erskine to split with the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church. On one of the Facebook pages on which alumni wrote in favor of the split, Crenshaw posted the following,

I think this [Facebook page] does accomplish three things. First it spreads the word and the outrage. This [page] is a means to an end. The end[s] are the other two accomplishments: second, people are encouraged to quit donating to Erskine and to quit sending their kids until all this is straightened up. The power of the purse is far more significant and successful than any behind the scenes deal-cutting has been. And third, this [page] shines the light on the actions of Synod, wingnuts, and the admin; i.e., it delivers a healthy wallop of bad publicity to Erskine, which means they have to spend time countering the bad publicity and answering for what they are doing. I would submit that if there is behind the scenes pressure being put on the admin or the wingnuts, it has come from the sense of outrage generated by this site that led to private, chew-them-out phone calls, not something achieved by following Marquis of Queensbury^{[2 ]} niceties.

On August 6, 2011, President Norman met privately with Crenshaw to attempt to resolve the dispute. Both men made audio recordings of the meeting. President Norman began the meeting by reading a letter stating Erskine was beginning termination proceedings because of the way Crenshaw treated his colleagues in the aftermath of the ambulance incident. Norman informed Crenshaw he was suspended, and thus would not be teaching in the fall semester. Norman outlined the steps Crenshaw must take to keep his job. First, Crenshaw must apologize to the officials who filed grievances against him. Second, he must apologize to the faculty for his abrasive behavior towards the ad hoc committee. Third, he must apologize to the Erskine Community—"the people that read your [Facebook posts], that sort of thing"—for disparaging the institution. Crenshaw was contentious through much of the meeting, telling Norman at one point, "Oh, come on. You're a son of a bitch.... You're a nice son of a bitch, but you're still a son of a bitch."

Crenshaw brought up the possibility of taking an early retirement, and the two discussed the terms of a potential retirement agreement. On August 8, Crenshaw emailed Norman indicating he and his attorney were "willing to discuss" early retirement. Norman replied by sending Crenshaw a draft retirement announcement and retirement agreement which provided twenty-one days for Crenshaw to consider the retirement option.

On August 12, Norman sent Crenshaw an email with an attached letter. In the email, Norman assured Crenshaw the early retirement offer "still stands." In the letter, Norman outlined three categories of allegations. The first category included Crenshaw's climbing into the ambulance, his pushing of the student's guardian, and his medical advice to the student when others with more authority were present. Norman labeled this behavior "rude" and said it was beyond Crenshaw's authority to attempt to overrule the student's guardian and EMS personnel. The second category involved Crenshaw's behavior during the grievance process. Norman labeled this behavior as "bullying" and "contempt[uous]" and said it "evidence[d] a pattern" of "volatility" that "has created a hostile working environment on...