Eide v. Oldham-Ramona School Dist. No. 39-5, OLDHAM-RAMONA

CourtSupreme Court of South Dakota
Writing for the CourtHENDERSON; MILLER
Citation516 N.W.2d 322,91 Ed.LawRep. 332
Decision Date15 February 1994
Docket NumberOLDHAM-RAMONA,No. 18433
Parties91 Ed. Law Rep. 332 Kathleen "Katie" EIDE, Appellee, v.SCHOOL DISTRICT # 39-5, Appellant. . Considered on Briefs

Page 322

516 N.W.2d 322
91 Ed. Law Rep. 332
Kathleen "Katie" EIDE, Appellee,
v.
OLDHAM-RAMONA SCHOOL DISTRICT # 39-5, Appellant.
No. 18433.
Supreme Court of South Dakota.
Considered on Briefs Feb. 15, 1994.
Decided May 18, 1994.

Thomas M. Issenhuth, Chris S. Giles of Arneson, Issenhuth, Gienapp & Blair, Madison, for appellee.

Jerome B. Lammers of Lammers, Lammers, Kleibacker and Parent, Madison, for appellant.

HENDERSON, Justice.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY/ISSUES

Kathleen Eide (Eide) filed a grievance against the Oldham-Ramona School District # 39-5 (District) on June 19, 1991. Following an administrative hearing by the South Dakota Department of Labor (Department) on September 10, 1992, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law were issued in favor of Eide. Per Judgment entered on June 8, 1993, the trial court affirmed the decision and adopted the Department's findings and conclusions. District appeals these issues:

I. Did the Department of Labor err in awarding Eide damages for the 1990-91 and 1991-92 school years and awarding Eide the Chapter 1 Mathematics position for 1992-93?

II. Did the circuit court err in awarding Eide the Chapter I Mathematics position for 1993-94 and affirming the Department of Labor?

As Eide was wrongly denied the Chapter 1 teaching position, we affirm and additionally

Page 323

award her the disputed position for the school year immediately following release of this opinion. We affirm.
FACTS

During the summer of 1990, Dalton Williams, superintendent of the Oldham-Ramona School District, filed an application so the District could receive a grant from the State to fund the necessary staff to instruct children with special education needs in "Chapter 1" classes. On page 5 of the application, Ed Buys was listed as the certified instructor who would teach Chapter 1 Mathematics "half-time" for the 1990-91 school year. District claims that Buys was merely offered an aide position; however, the salary listed was commensurate with a certified teacher, not an aide. ARSD 24:03:05:06 dictates that an "aide may only support the basic instruction of a classroom teacher and may not supplant the teacher. A teacher aide must be supervised by a certified person." The record further reveals that aides in the Oldham-Ramona School District are paid on an hourly, rather than salary, basis.

Eide, who began teaching for the District during the 1988-89 term and was certified to teach Chapter 1 Math, informed Diane Spilde, principal at Eide's elementary school, that she was interested in the Chapter 1 position should Buys reject it. Spilde replied that the position had already been promised to Paula Stevens. Soon thereafter, Buys did reject the offer, and Stevens got the job. Neither Eide nor Stevens had been listed on the Chapter 1 application as possibilities to teach this half-time class.

At the August 14, 1990, school board meeting, board member Jim Carmody expressed doubt about Stevens' certification to teach the class, so he phrased his motion to accept Stevens' signed contract as a "part-time Chapter 1 Aide." Stevens' contract was not on the form normally used for aides; rather, she signed a standard certified teacher contract with aide status noted thereon. Additionally, the salary specified on the contract was for a certified teacher, not an aide. For the same school year, Eide was hired as a "2/5" computer teacher at a salary of $6,436 and a kindergarten aide for 24 hours per week at $5.00 per hour.

After the school employees' salaries were published in the local newspaper, Eide's husband, Roger Eide, made inquiries at a November 1990 school board meeting. Roger testified that superintendent Williams assured him that Stevens was certified to teach Chapter 1 Math. But, Carmody later verified that Stevens was not certified for that subject.

In response, Williams filed an "Authority to Act" with the South Dakota Division of Education, Office of School Standards, seeking permission for Stevens to teach the course for the 1990-91 school year. According to the form Williams signed, Stevens was not qualified to teach Chapter 1 Mathematics. Nevertheless, the state superintendent of schools approved Stevens to finish out the year teaching a class she was not qualified to teach. However, District did not reduce her "certified" salary to "aide" wages.

Thereafter, Eide filed a grievance with District claiming she should have been chosen to teach the Chapter 1 class because she was the only certified teacher to express interest in the job after Buys turned down the position. District denied her claim contending that the position created was for an aide, not a certified teacher; therefore, Stevens' hiring was appropriate. Contrary to District's personnel policy manual, Eide's name was thereafter published in the minutes and newspaper as a grievant.

For the subsequent school year, 1991-92, Stevens signed an aide contract to be a Chapter 1 Mathematics aide, compensating her by the hour, rather than salary. However, the position was returned to "certified" status and awarded to a certified teacher for the 1992-93 term.

On review, the Department of Labor disagreed with District and held that Eide should have been the Chapter 1 teacher for 1990-91 and 1991-92. Eide was awarded damages and the teaching position for 1992-93. District was also ordered to apologize to Eide in the newspaper. District admitted to improperly publishing Eide's name.

Page 324

DECISION

When an administrative agency's decision is appealed to circuit court and the final judgment of that court is appealed to this Court, we make the same review made by the circuit court. Caldwell v. John Morrell & Co., 489 N.W.2d 353 (S.D.1992). If the issue is one of fact, the findings of the agency must be clearly erroneous to be reversed. Conclusions of Law are open to full review. Permann...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 practice notes
  • Estate of Tallman, Matter of, No. 19702
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of South Dakota
    • March 24, 1997
    ...merely provides for the filing requirements of the motion; he cites no other authority. See Eide v. Oldham-Ramona Sch. Dist. No. 39-5, 516 N.W.2d 322, 326 (S.D.1994) ("[Appellant] sets forth no authorities by way of cases or statutes to support her request."). Therefore, his motion for appe......
  • Cleveland v. Tinaglia, Nos. 20183
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of South Dakota
    • April 28, 1998
    ...to be accorded their testimony, and the weight of evidence is left to the factfinder." Eide v. Oldham-Ramona School Dist. No. 39-5, 516 N.W.2d 322, 324 (S.D.1994) (citing Insurance Agents, Inc. v. Zimmerman, 381 N.W.2d 218 (S.D.1986)). Conflicts in the evidence are resolved in favor of the ......
  • Schroeder v. Department of Social Services, No. 18517
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of South Dakota
    • September 12, 1994
    ...Water Management Bd., 351 N.W.2d 119, 122 (S.D.1984)) (emphasis supplied). Similarly, in Eide v. Oldham-Ramona Sch. Dist. No. 39-5, 516 N.W.2d 322 (S.D.1994), we When an administrative agency's decision is appealed to circuit court and the final judgment of that court is appealed to this Co......
  • Scotland Vet Supply v. ABA Recovery Service, Inc., No. 20228
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of South Dakota
    • April 29, 1998
    ...set forth in the contract itself, we identify no clear error in this finding. See Eide v. Oldham-Ramona School Dist. No. 39-5, 516 N.W.2d 322, 324 (S.D.1994) (credibility of witnesses, weight to be accorded their testimony and weight of the evidence are left to the trier of fact). See also ......
4 cases
  • Estate of Tallman, Matter of, No. 19702
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of South Dakota
    • March 24, 1997
    ...merely provides for the filing requirements of the motion; he cites no other authority. See Eide v. Oldham-Ramona Sch. Dist. No. 39-5, 516 N.W.2d 322, 326 (S.D.1994) ("[Appellant] sets forth no authorities by way of cases or statutes to support her request."). Therefore, his motion for appe......
  • Cleveland v. Tinaglia, Nos. 20183
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of South Dakota
    • April 28, 1998
    ...to be accorded their testimony, and the weight of evidence is left to the factfinder." Eide v. Oldham-Ramona School Dist. No. 39-5, 516 N.W.2d 322, 324 (S.D.1994) (citing Insurance Agents, Inc. v. Zimmerman, 381 N.W.2d 218 (S.D.1986)). Conflicts in the evidence are resolved in favor of the ......
  • Schroeder v. Department of Social Services, No. 18517
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of South Dakota
    • September 12, 1994
    ...Water Management Bd., 351 N.W.2d 119, 122 (S.D.1984)) (emphasis supplied). Similarly, in Eide v. Oldham-Ramona Sch. Dist. No. 39-5, 516 N.W.2d 322 (S.D.1994), we When an administrative agency's decision is appealed to circuit court and the final judgment of that court is appealed to this Co......
  • Scotland Vet Supply v. ABA Recovery Service, Inc., No. 20228
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of South Dakota
    • April 29, 1998
    ...set forth in the contract itself, we identify no clear error in this finding. See Eide v. Oldham-Ramona School Dist. No. 39-5, 516 N.W.2d 322, 324 (S.D.1994) (credibility of witnesses, weight to be accorded their testimony and weight of the evidence are left to the trier of fact). See also ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT