Jett v. Dallas Independent School Dist.
| Decision Date | 27 August 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 85-1015,85-1015 |
| Citation | 798 F.2d 748 |
| Parties | 41 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 1076, 41 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 36,691, 55 USLW 2165, 34 Ed. Law Rep. 384 Norman JETT, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DALLAS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT and Frederick Todd, Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
David W. Townend, Garland, Tex., for defendants-appellants.
Holl, Heard, Oneal, Gilstrap & Goetz, Frank W. Hill, Shane Goetz, Michael Anthony Rossetti, Frank Gilstrap, Arlington, Tex., for plaintiff-appellee.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas.
Before GEE, RANDALL, and GARWOOD, Circuit Judges.
Appellee Norman Jett brought this suit against appellants, his former employer, the Dallas Independent School District (DISD), and Frederick Todd, his immediate supervisor, under 42 U.S.C. Secs. 1981 and 1983, alleging due process, First Amendment, and equal protection violations. The district court entered judgment against the DISD and against Todd in his individual capacity. We reverse the finding that Jett suffered due process violations, holding that Jett was not deprived of a protected property interest. We further hold that the evidence is insufficient to support a finding of constructive discharge. We affirm liability against Todd in his individual capacity based on the racial discrimination and First Amendment claims. However, we reverse and and remand on the issue of the DISD's liability, because the jury did not make sufficient findings to support municipal liability. Furthermore, we reverse and remand as to damages.
Norman Jett, a white, was the athletic director/head football coach at South Oak Cliff High School in Dallas, Texas until his reassignment to another DISD school in 1983. He was employed by the DISD from 1957 until 1983, and had taught and coached at South Oak Cliff since 1962. Around 1970, the year Jett was promoted to athletic director/head football coach, the racial composition at South Oak Cliff changed from predominantly white to predominantly black.
Frederick Todd, a black, was assigned as principal to South Oak Cliff in 1975. Tensions developed between Jett and Todd concerning several issues, including Jett's attendance record at faculty meetings, equipment purchasing policies, and lesson plan preparation. Several of the problems centered around the November 19, 1982 football game between South Oak Cliff and Plano. Prior to the game, Jett was quoted by a newspaper as saying his team was bigger and better than SMU and the Dallas Cowboys. Todd objected to this statement, believing that it was not true and that it degraded a collegiate team and a professional team. After South Oak Cliff lost the game, Jett entered the officials' locker room in violation of league rules and stated to two black officials that he would never use black officials in another game. Jett had requested black officials for the game despite the Plano coach's position against using black officials. Other controversies erupted over this game, including a reporter's accusations that Jett and other coaches were bribed, players' complaints that the game plan was not followed, and coaches' complaints that nonschool personnel were allowed in the booth. Todd felt that Jett did not show proper leadership in responding to these complaints. In another incident, Jett was quoted in the newspaper as stating that only two South Oak Cliff athletes could meet proposed NCAA academic eligibility requirements. Todd objected to this statement because he believed that far more graduates could meet the proposed requirements.
On March 15, 1983, Todd informed Jett that he intended to recommend that Jett be relieved as athletic director/head football coach. Todd sent a letter dated March 17, 1983 to John Kincaide, white, director of athletics for the DISD, recommending Jett's removal based on poor leadership performance, his inability to plan adequately, and the events surrounding the Plano game.
After meeting with Jett on March 15, Todd made an appointment for Jett to see Kincaide that day. Jett met with Kincaide at the DISD Administration Building. Kincaide suggested to Jett that he return to South Oak Cliff until he received something in writing. Jett then met with John Santillo, director of personnel for the DISD, who suggested to Jett that he should transfer schools because the damage had already been done. At this point, Jett became upset and Santillo suggested that he and Jett meet with Linus Wright, white, Superintendent of the DISD. During this meeting, Jett informed Wright and Santillo that he believed Todd's recommendation was unfounded and that Todd wanted a black coach. Wright suggested that Jett should consider leaving South Oak Cliff, because he and Todd were having difficulties working together. Wright then assured him that the DISD would take care of him and find him another position.
On March 25, 1983, Wright, Santillo, Kincaide, Todd, and two other school officials met to determine whether Jett should remain at South Oak Cliff. Jett was not invited to attend. After the meeting, Wright officially affirmed Todd's recommendation to remove Jett as South Oak Cliff athletic director/head football coach based on irreconcilable conflicts between Jett and Todd. Wright explained at trial that in such circumstances he was compelled to go with the principal.
Soon after the meeting, Santillo notified Jett of his reassignment as a teacher at the Business Magnet School and told him it was the only position available. This assignment, which was effective approximately April 4, 1983, did not include any coaching responsibilities. Although Jett reported to the Business Magnet School, he soon began to miss class because of his emotional distress. After Santillo expressed concern about his poor attendance record, Jett again met with Santillo on May 4, and then with Wright that same day. Wright told Jett that, although no athletic director/head coaching positions were available at the time, Jett would not have to apply for a coaching job and would be considered for any that came open.
On May 5, 1983, Santillo wrote Jett a letter stating that he was being placed on the "unassigned personnel budget," and that he was being assigned to the security department, but that he could not expect to remain in the department for the next school year. The letter also informed Jett that he could pursue any available position and that, if he was not recommended for a staff or quasi-administrative position, he would be assigned a classroom teacher position. Upon receiving the letter, Jett filed this suit.
Around August 4, 1983, Jett received notice that he had been assigned to Jefferson High School as a history teacher/freshman football coach/freshman track coach. Although a head coaching job had previously become available at Madison High School, Jett was not assigned this position, nor did he apply for it. Kincaide decided against assigning Jett to the Madison position because of the pending lawsuit. On August 19, 1983, Jett sent his letter of resignation to the DISD.
Jett's suit was brought against the DISD, Todd in his individual and official capacities, and the DISD Board of Trustees in their official capacities under 42 U.S.C. Secs. 1981 and 1983. The jury determined that Jett was deprived of his position as athletic director/head football coach prior to the end of the 1982-1983 school year based on his race and his exercise of protected speech and in violation of his right to procedural due process. In addition, the jury found that Jett was constructively terminated from DISD employment in August 1983. The jury awarded Jett a total of $850,000, including $50,000 punitive damages against Todd. The district court set aside the award of punitive damages, finding "[t]here is absolutely no evidence that Defendant Todd's actions were taken in a malicious, wanton or oppressive manner." It also ordered a remittitur, which plaintiff accepted, with the resulting judgment being against the DISD for $450,000 actual damages, plus $112,870.45 for attorneys' fees, with Todd's being jointly and severally liable for all the attorneys' fees and $50,000 of the damages.
Defendants Todd and the DISD timely filed this appeal.
Defendants first challenge the finding that Jett suffered a due process violation arguing that Jett did not have a property interest in the athletic director/head football coach position at South Oak Cliff. They also contend that Jett was not constructively terminated in August 1983, and thus was not deprived of any property interest he may have had in the remainder (or in renewal) of his contract. 1 We must decide whether Jett had a constitutionally protected property interest by reference to state law. Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532, 105 S.Ct. 1487, 1491, 84 L.Ed.2d 494 (1985); Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 92 S.Ct. 2701, 2709, 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972). The Supreme Court has described the "hallmark of property" as "an individual entitlement grounded in state law, which cannot be removed except 'for cause.' " Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co., 455 U.S. 422, 102 S.Ct. 1148, 1155, 71 L.Ed.2d 265 (1982).
Under Texas law, a school district may adopt the continuing contract scheme provided by Tex.Educ.Code Ann. Sec. 13.101 (Vernon 1972), or it may offer fixed term contracts under section 23.28 of the Education Code. See Wells v. Hico Independent School District, 736 F.2d 243, 252 (5th Cir.1984). The DISD has adopted a fixed term contract scheme. Jett was employed under a five-year "teacher contract" that extended until the end of the 1983-1984 school year. He taught classes and was a member of the faculty. The written contract provided that Jett was employed as a teacher "subject to assignment." The contract authorized the superintendent "to assign the teacher to such school as he...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Barnes v. Federal Express Corporation, Civil Action No. 1:95cv333-D-D (N.D. Miss. 4/__/2001)
...See, e.g., Flanagan v. A.E. Henry Community Health Servs. Cen., 876 F.2d 1231, 1233 (5th Cir. 1989); see also Jett v. Dallas Independent School Dist., 798 F.2d 748, 756 (5th Cir.), aff'd in part, 491 U.S. 701, 737, 109 S.Ct. 2702, 2723-24, 105 L.Ed.2d 598 (1989); Whiting v. Jackson State Un......
-
Coleman v. Rance, Civil Action No. 4:96cv21-D-B (N.D. Miss. 4/__/2001)
...and its subdivisions. See, e.g, Voisin's Oyster House, Inc. v. Guidry, 799 F.2d 183, 186 (5th Cir. 1986); Jett v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist., 798 F.2d 748, 762 n.13 (5th Cir. 1986); Davis v. Department of Health, 744 F.Supp. 756, 757 (S.D. Miss. 1990). Nevertheless, the Eleventh Amendment doe......
-
Lofton v. City of West Point
...in promotions are not alone enough to support a finding of constructive discharge.") (citation omitted); Jett v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist., 798 F.2d 748, 752, 755 (5th Cir. 1986) (finding no constructive discharge after the plaintiff was demoted "with much sorrow and humiliation" from his jo......
-
Suttles v. US Postal Service
...subjective preference for one position over another." Epps v. NCNB Texas, 7 F.3d 44, 46 (5th Cir.1993) (citing Jett v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist., 798 F.2d 748, 755 (5th Cir.1986), remanded in part on other grounds, 491 U.S. 701, 109 S.Ct. 2702, 105 L.Ed.2d 598 (1989)). In Barrow, the court l......
-
Constructive Discharge
...in force could not establish constructive discharge), reh’g denied , 992 F.2d 326 (5th Cir. 1993); Jeff v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist. , 798 F.2d 748, 755 (5th Cir. 1986) (although a demotion may constitute a constructive discharge in some circumstances, high school coach’s loss of coaching re......
-
Constructive Discharge
...in force could not establish constructive discharge), reh’g denied , 992 F.2d 326 (5th Cir. 1993); Jeৼ v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist. , 798 F.2d 748, 755 (5th Cir. 1986) (although a demotion may constitute a constructive discharge in some circumstances, high school coach’s loss of coaching res......
-
Constructive discharge
...in force could not establish constructive discharge), reh’g denied , 992 F.2d 326 (5th Cir. 1993); Jeff v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist. , 798 F.2d 748, 755 (5th Cir. 1986) (although a demotion may constitute a constructive discharge in some circumstances, high school coach’s loss of coaching re......
-
Constructive Discharge
...in force could not establish constructive discharge), reh’g denied, 992 F.2d 326 (5th Cir. 1993); Jeff v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist., 798 F.2d 748, 755 (5th Cir. 1986) (although a demotion may constitute a constructive discharge in some circumstances, high school coach’s loss of coaching resp......