Parsells v. Bd. of Educ. of the Borough of Somerville

Decision Date06 June 2022
Docket NumberDOCKET NO. A-3084-19
Parties Catherine PARSELLS, Petitioner-Respondent, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the BOROUGH OF SOMERVILLE, Somerset County, Respondent-Appellant.
CourtNew Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division

Marc H. Zitomer, Florham Park, argued the cause for appellant (Schenck, Price, Smith and King, LLP, attorneys; Marc H. Zitomer, of counsel and on the briefs; Christopher J. Sedefian, on the briefs).

Hop T. Wechsler, Mount Laurel, argued the cause for respondent Catherine Parsells (Selikoff & Cohen, PA, attorneys; Hop T. Wechsler, on the brief).

Andrew J. Bruck, Acting Attorney General, attorney for respondent New Jersey Commissioner of Education (David L. Kalisky, Deputy Attorney General, on the statement in lieu of brief).

Before Judges Fisher, DeAlmeida and Smith.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

SMITH, J.A.D.

In a final decision, the Commissioner of Education (Commissioner) found that the Somerville Board of Education (Board) violated the rights of Catherine Parsells when it refused to permit her to return to her position as a tenured full-time teacher. An administrative law judge (ALJ) found for the Board, concluding Parsells had voluntarily stepped down from her full-time teaching position and as such had no right to return to it. The Commissioner reversed the ALJ's initial decision, ordering the Board to reinstate Parsells to the position of full-time teacher, retroactive to the 2018-2019 school year, with full back pay, benefits, and related emoluments of employment, less any mitigation costs.

The Board appeals, arguing among other things that the Commissioner's decision was arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable. We defer to the Commissioner's findings and affirm. In doing so, we hold that school boards have a duty to notify, in advance, full-time teachers who consider voluntarily transferring to part-time teaching positions that they may not have a right to return to their full-time position consistent with the principles espoused in Bridgewater-Raritan Educ. Ass'n v. Bd. of Educ. of Bridgewater-Raritan Sch. Dist., 221 N.J. 349, 113 A.3d 764 (2015).

I.

The parties stipulated to the facts, which were adopted by the ALJ.1 Parsells, a tenured teacher, was employed full-time by the Board from September 2010 to June 2016. On May 2, 2016, Parsells wrote to Superintendent Dr. Timothy Purnell seeking a transfer from full-time teaching to an available in-district part-time teaching position with benefits. In her letter, Parsells explained that she "would be interested in this position for as long as it is available, or until my family decides that full-time work would be in our best interest again" and stated that she was "very appreciative of being given the opportunity to be considered for a position that would allow me to continue working as a teacher pursuing my career goals while also being able to spend time with my son during his precious [early] years."

On May 17, the Board approved Parsells' requested transfer from full-time to part-time teacher for the 2016-17 school year. Later that summer, the Board also appointed Parsells as a Preschool Team Leader for the 2016-17 school year. The Board did not advise her in advance she would not have a right to return to any full-time position if she voluntarily took the part-time position.2

On or about November 18, 2016, Parsells requested and was subsequently granted maternity leave and a childcare leave of absence, effective February 2 to June 30, 2017. Parsells wrote the Board on February 1, 2017 to express her interest in continuing work as a part-time teacher during the upcoming 2017-18 school year, provided the position continued to include benefits.

In July, Dr. Purnell and Dr. Teehan responded to Parsells. They informed her that her part-time role would no longer be afforded benefits, so if she wanted benefits for the 2017-18 school year, she would need to teach full-time. When a full-time position became available, Parsells declined the offer, citing family reasons. On July 13, 2017, Parsells wrote to Dr. Teehan seeking permission to extend her maternity leave for the entire 2017-18 school year. The Board granted her request.

In April 2018, Dr. Teehan spoke to Parsells regarding her work status for the 2018-19 school year. He informed Parsells she had no automatic entitlement to a full-time teaching position and that she relinquished her rights to the same when she applied for and accepted the part-time role. Moreover, he explained to her that if a full-time position were to become available, she would be required to apply for it. Parsells applied for the full-time work and participated in interviews. However, she was not selected by the Board for the available full-time positions. The successful candidates were non-tenured applicants who had not previously been employed by the school district.

Parsells appealed to the Commissioner, arguing that she did not waive her tenure rights by accepting a part-time position and that the Board further violated her rights by hiring out of district teachers with no tenure for the available full-time positions instead of her. After a two-day hearing, the ALJ rendered an initial decision in favor of the Board, finding that Parsells voluntarily went from full-time to part-time status, excluding her from reduction-in-force protection and making her ineligible to return to her full-time teaching position.

The ALJ made other findings. She found "none of [Parsells'] supervisors or other Board personnel advised [Parsells] how her voluntary transfer to a part-time position would impact her ability to return to a full-time position."3 The ALJ found Parsells testified credibly that she believed she "would be able to return to her former full-time position when she no longer wanted to have a part-time schedule," and that had she known otherwise, she would not have chosen part-time teaching status.

The Commissioner, accepting the facts as found by the ALJ, reversed the initial decision, finding that Parsells did not knowingly and voluntarily waive her right to a full-time position, including the salary and benefits associated with it. The Commissioner's final decision returned Parsells to a full-time position in the school district, finding that Bridgewater-Raritan supported the finding that Parsells did not waive any rights to her full-time position, and that the Board had a separate duty to inform Parsells of the consequences of going part-time before she voluntarily changed jobs, including informing her of the loss of her right to return to full-time job status. 221 N.J. 349, 113 A.3d 764.

The Board appeals the final decision, arguing that the Commissioner's decision was arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable. The Board further argues that the Commissioner erred in finding the Board was required to give notice of the impact of Parsells' switch to part-time, and that her declining a full-time job for the 2017-18 year waived any right she had to return to full-time tenured status.

II.

"[We] have ‘a limited role’ in the review of [agency] decisions." In re Stallworth, 208 N.J. 182, 194, 26 A.3d 1059 (2011) (quoting Henry v. Rahway State Prison, 81 N.J. 571, 579, 410 A.2d 686 (1980) ). "[A] ‘strong presumption of reasonableness attaches to [an agency decision].’ " In re Carroll, 339 N.J. Super. 429, 437, 772 A.2d 45 (App. Div. 2001) (quoting In re Vey, 272 N.J. Super. 199, 205, 639 A.2d 724 (App. Div. 1993) ). "In order to reverse an agency's judgment, [we] must find the agency's decision to be ‘arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable, or [ ] not supported by substantial credible evidence in the record as a whole.’ " Stallworth, 208 N.J. at 194, 26 A.3d 1059 (second alteration in original) (quoting Henry, 81 N.J. at 579-80, 410 A.2d 686 ). The burden of proving that an agency action is arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable is on the challenger. Bueno v. Bd. of Trs., 422 N.J. Super. 227, 234, 27 A.3d 1237 (App. Div. 2011) (citing McGowan v. N.J. State Parole Bd., 347 N.J. Super. 544, 563, 790 A.2d 974 (App. Div. 2002) ).

We " ‘may not substitute [our] own judgment for the agency's, even though [we] might have reached a different result.’ " Stallworth, 208 N.J. at 194, 26 A.3d 1059 (quoting In re Carter, 191 N.J. 474, 483, 924 A.2d 525 (2007) ). "This is particularly true when the issue under review is directed to the agency's special ‘expertise and superior knowledge of a particular field.’ " Id. at 195, 26 A.3d 1059 (quoting In re Herrmann, 192 N.J. 19, 28, 926 A.2d 350 (2007) ). Furthermore, "[a]n administrative agency's interpretation of statutes and regulations within its implementing and enforcing responsibility is ordinarily entitled to our deference." In re Appeal by Progressive Cas. Ins. Co., 307 N.J. Super. 93, 102, 704 A.2d 562 (App. Div. 1997).

III.

The Board argues that the Commissioner erred by misinterpreting the Supreme Court's decision in Bridgewater-Raritan to require advance notice from the Board without an express statutory provision. The record shows no dispute concerning the events that led to Parsells' claim, therefore this appeal turns on competing interpretations of the Supreme Court's decision in Bridgewater-Raritan. The question is whether Bridgewater-Raritan compels school boards to notify in advance a full-time tenured teacher who voluntarily takes a part-time teaching position that she is at risk of not getting her full-time job back. A review of the holding in Bridgewater-Raritan is in order.

In Bridgewater-Raritan, the Court reversed in part the Commissioner's summary dismissal of a petition filed by three temporarily assigned replacement teachers who were advised by school administrators that their service time would count toward tenure. The advice was flawed, and the teacher's employment contracts were then non-renewed by the school board. The Court affirmed the Commissioner's dismissal of two of the three petitions...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • In re Curio Holdings NJ, LLC'S
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division
    • August 30, 2023
    ...483, 515 (2018). "[A] 'strong presumption of reasonableness attaches to [an agency decision].'" Parsells v. Bd. of Educ. of Somerville, 472 N.J.Super. 369, 375 (App. Div. 2022) (alterations in original) (quoting In re Carroll, 339 N.J.Super. 429, 437 (App. Div. 2001)), aff'd as modified, 25......
  • State, Dep't of Cmty. Affairs v. Ameri
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division
    • February 27, 2023
    ... ... Parsells v. Bd. of Educ., 472 N.J.Super. 369, 376 ... (App. Div. 2022) ... first time in a reply brief is improper," Borough of ... ...
  • Meyers v. State Health Benefits Comm'n
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division
    • October 25, 2022
    ...(1980) ). "[A] ‘strong presumption of reasonableness attaches to [an agency decision].’ " Parsells v. Bd. of Educ. of Borough of Somerville, 472 N.J. Super. 369, 375, 277 A.3d 33 (App. Div. 2022) (citing In re Carroll, 339 N.J. Super. 429, 437, 772 A.2d 45 (App. Div. 2001) ). "Board decisio......

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