Newnam v. Board of Ed. of Mount Pleasant School Dist.
| Citation | 350 A.2d 339 |
| Parties | 91 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2750, 80 Lab.Cas. P 53,890 Linda L. NEWNAM, Plaintiff below, Appellant, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the MOUNT PLEASANT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant below, Appellee. |
| Decision Date | 29 December 1975 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Delaware |
Upon appeal from the Court of Chancery. Remanded.
Sheldon N. Sandler, of Bader, Dorsey & Kreshtool, Wilmington, for plaintiff below, appellant.
F. Alton Tybout, of Tybout & Redfearn, P.A., Wilmington, for defendant below, appellee.
Before HERRMANN, C.J., and DUFFY and McNEILLY, JJ.
In this action by a non-tenured teacher (plaintiff) to compel performance by the Board of Education of the Mount Pleasant School District (defendant) of the final step in a grievance procedure under a collective bargaining agreement, the Court of Chancery granted defendant's motion for summary judgment. 325 A.2d 387 (1974). Reference is made to the Chancery Opinion for a complete statement of the facts. This appeal followed.
Plaintiff had been given appropriate notice by the Board that she would not be tenured and that her teaching contract would not be renewed. She concedes that there is no duty on defendant to rehire her, but she invoked the grievance procedure in hope of getting a favorable recommendation from an Advisory Committee that would counteract unfavorable evaluation of her professional performance. 1 Plaintiff's primary attack is upon the Chancery Court's construction of 14 Del.C. ch. 14, to wit:
After analyzing the Statute, the Court thus concluded that the mere making of such a contract (to submit for review the reasons for dropping a nontenured teacher) was beyond the power of the Board. We think, however, that the case calls for a narrower approach which begins with the present state of the parties and other pertinent facts.
In our view, the Trial Court must first consider whether the controversy between the parties has been mooted by time and change of circumstance. The evaluation report which generated the lawsuit was made in March 1973 and, since the object of the action is to secure from an Advisory Committee a 'report (of) recommendations for settlement within fifteen days,' the controversy may no longer be viable. While it may be said that the question posed is important in the administration of the Professional Negotiations and Relations Act, 14 Del.C. § 4001 et seq., we are not persuaded that the public interest therein is so great that the Court should decide the issue if it is moot between the parties.
If the Trial Court finds that the issue is not moot, it must then consider whether the claim here made is a 'grievance' within the meaning of the contract. Under the bargaining agreement 'grievance' is defined as,
'. . . a claim by an employee . . . that the established policy of the Mount Pleasant Board of Education or the Mount Pleasant School District has been ignored, overlooked, misinterpreted, or misapplied, or that the right to fair treatment has been violated.'
Applied to the present dispute, we find that the word 'grievance' is ambiguous and so a hearing is necessary to determine its meaning. Fidance v. Giordano, Del.Supr., 237 A.2d 393 (1967). If the Court finds that there was no intent to include in the grievance procedure the kind of controversy here involved, that will end the matter. On the other hand, if the Court finds such an intent, then it must consider what relief is to be accorded plaintiff.
We turn now to the Trial Court's ruling on the power of the Board to agree to bargain with respect to renewal of a nontenured teacher's contract. Beyond doubt, as the Court ruled, there is no statutory duty...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wilcoxon v. Red Clay Consolidated School. Dist. Bd., CIV.05-524 SLR.
...clause in the collective bargaining agreement allowed only for an informal discussion of the reasons for non-renewal); Newnam v. Bd. of Educ., 350 A.2d 339, 340 (Del.1975) (finding Board does not have statutory duty to bargain with respect to renewal of a non-tenured teacher's contract and ......
-
New Castle-Gunning Bedford Ed. Ass'n v. BD. OF ED., ETC.
...they concede that non-tenured Delaware teachers are not granted a property interest by state statute. Newnam v. Board of Ed. of Mt. Pleasant Sch. Dist., 350 A.2d 339, 340 (Del.Sup. 1975). Thus, the plaintiffs rely exclusively upon the Master Agreement between the Board and the Education Ass......
-
Colonial School Bd. v. Colonial Affiliate, NCCEA/DSEA/NEA
...II. The Court of Chancery agreed generally with the Board's contentions, but concluded that Newnam v. Board of Education of Mt. Pleasant School District, Del.Supr., 350 A.2d 339 (1975) governed and that, therefore, it was compelled to rule in favor of the Union. * We agree with the Court of......
-
Mount Pleasant School Dist. v. Warder
...accomplished by the implied susceptibility to suit and the power to litigate a hiring dispute. Newman v. Board of Education of the Mount Pleasant School Dist., Del.Supr., 350 A.2d 339 (1975). The proposition is generally accepted that "the authority of a school district to sue or be sued ap......