Drown v. West Virginia Civil Service Com'n

• Decision Date: 23 November 1988
• Docket Number: No. 18536,18536
• Citation: 180 W.Va. 143,375 S.E.2d 775
• Court: West Virginia Supreme Court
• Parties: Helen (Polly) DROWN, Appellant, v. WEST VIRGINIA CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION and West Virginia Department of Veterans Affairs, Appellees. West Virginia

Page 775

375 S.E.2d 775

180 W.Va. 143

Helen (Polly) DROWN, Appellant, v. WEST VIRGINIA CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION and West Virginia

Department of Veterans Affairs, Appellees.

No. 18536.

Supreme Court of Appeals of

West Virginia.

Nov. 23, 1988.

Syllabus by the Court

1. "W.Va.Code, 29-6-15, requires that the dismissal of a civil service employee be for good cause, which means misconduct of a substantial nature directly affecting the rights and interests of the public, rather than upon trivial or inconsequential matters, or mere technical violations of statute or official duty without wrongful intention." Syllabus Point 1, Oakes v. West Virginia Dept. of Fin. & Admi., 164 W.Va. 384, 264 S.E.2d 151 (1980).

2. "A public employee is ordinarily not chargeable with the negligent acts or omissions of his subordinate unless he participates in such acts or otherwise sanctions them." Syllabus Point 2, Oakes v. West Virginia Dept. of Fin. & Admin., 164 W.Va. 384, 264 S.E.2d 151 (1980).

Alexander J. Ross, Rosalee Juba Plumley, Ross, Brown & Juba, Charleston, W.Va., for Drown.

Edward L. Bullman, Asst. Atty. Gen., Charleston, W.Va., for Veterans Affairs, West Virginia Civil Service Com'n.

PER CURIAM:

Helen (Polly) Drown appeals from the final order of the West Virginia Civil Service Commission (Commission) upholding the appellant's dismissal from employment with the Department of Veterans' Affairs (Department). We granted this appeal to determine whether the record supported the Commission's finding that the appellant had been guilty of misconduct justifying dismissal. After examining the record, we conclude that the evidence did not support a dismissal and we reverse the decision of the Commission.

By letter dated December 30, 1986, Ms. Drown was dismissed from her position as an Audit Clerk III at the Barboursville Veterans' Home. Among the charges were allegations that Ms. Drown's dereliction of duty enabled Marilyn Taylor, an employee under her direct supervision, to embezzle $29,000 from the Veterans' Home Trust Account between 1983 and 1985.

Ms. Drown appealed the dismissal to the Commission. During a hearing before the Commission, Ms. Drown presented evidence that her work evaluations had always been good to excellent; that due to lack of staff, she was only able to "spot check" Ms. Taylor's work; and that she had requested additional staff to properly carry out the fiscal division's responsibilities.

The Department admitted that Ms. Drown did not participate in the embezzlement nor have prior knowledge of or condone Ms. Taylor's acts. Ms. Drown argued that her dismissal by Veterans' Home Director, John W. Moon, was influenced by a personality conflict between them that had existed since 1983. This started when she along with a group of Veterans' Home employees met with officials in Charleston shortly after Mr. Moon's appointment as director to voice concern over his policies.

The Commission found that Ms. Drown was negligent in the performance of her assigned duties and responsibilities. Its finding relied primarily upon Ms. Drown's misplaced trust in Ms. Taylor's honesty. Specifically, Ms. Drown allowed Ms. Taylor to choose check vouchers to be reviewed and to prepare the "tapes" upon which account reconciliations were based. Ms. Taylor never showed her the vouchers on which checks were written in excess of the information supported by the vouchers. The Commission, therefore, concluded that good cause existed for her dismissal.

We reviewed the civil service statute in Oakes v. West Virginia Dept. of Fin. & Admin., 164 W.Va. 384, 264 S.E.2d 151 (1980), and said in Syllabus Point 1:

"W.Va.Code, 29-6-15, requires that the dismissal of a civil service employee be for good cause, which means misconduct of a substantial nature directly affecting the rights and interests of the public, rather than upon trivial or inconsequential matters, or mere technical violations of statute or official duty without wrongful intention."

See Guine v. Civil Serv. Comm'n, 149 W.Va. 461, 141 S.E.2d 364 (1965).

In Oakes, the Postmaster of the Capitol Post Office was dismissed because a subordinate employee failed to timely deliver two registered letters to the Purchasing Division of the Department of Finance and Administration. The letters contained bid proposals required for submission prior to the bid openings set for a specific time. The record disclosed no participation in or sanction of the late delivery of the mail by the postmaster, nor did he fail to give adequate instructions to subordinate employees. We reversed his dismissal.

"Good cause" for dismissal will be found when an employee's conduct shows a gross disregard for professional responsibilities or the public safety. Conduct rising to this level was shown in West Virginia Dept. of Corrections v. Lemasters, 173 W.Va. 159, 313 S.E.2d 436 (1984). There, a building maintenance supervisor at the West Virginia Penitentiary at Moundsville sold firearms to a felon convicted three times for armed robbery. The sale occurred within twenty-four hours of the prisoner's release from the penitentiary. Shortly after the sale, the felon was arrested on charges of possession of deadly weapons and public intoxication. We cautioned that "[a]lthough it is true that dismissal is inappropriate when the employee's violation is found to be merely a technical one, it is also true that seriously wrongful conduct can lead to dismissal even if it is not a technical...