Petrino v. Board of Ed. of City of Shelton

• Decision Date: 01 January 1980
• Citation: 179 Conn. 428,426 A.2d 795
• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
• Parties: Roger PETRINO v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the CITY OF SHELTON.

Page 795

426 A.2d 795

179 Conn. 428

Roger PETRINO v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the CITY OF SHELTON.

Supreme Court of Connecticut.

Argued Dec. 4, 1979.

Decision Released Jan. 1, 1980.

Thomas E. Minogue, Jr., Bridgeport, with whom, on brief, were Sidney L. Dworkin and Thomas W. Bucci, Bridgeport, for appellant (plaintiff).

John H. Welch, Jr., Shelton, for appellee (defendant).

Before COTTER, C. J., and LOISELLE, BOGDANSKI, PETERS and HEALEY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The sole issue in this case is whether the defendant Shelton Board of Education had due and sufficient cause to terminate the employment of the plaintiff, Roger Petrino, a tenured teacher. After the plaintiff had been found guilty of larceny in the second degree, a Class D felony, the defendant board informed the plaintiff that he was suspended without pay and that it was considering termination of his teaching contract pursuant to General Statutes § 10-151(b)(6). ¹ The plaintiff thereupon requested and had a hearing before an impartial hearing panel, as authorized by § 10-151(b). ² The impartial hearing panel, on the basis of testimony and exhibits before it, found that the plaintiff had been convicted as charged but decided that there was not due and sufficient cause for his termination and recommended dismissal of the charge against him and reinstatement without back pay. The defendant board nonetheless voted to terminate the plaintiff's contract of employment, whereupon the plaintiff appealed to the trial court pursuant to § 10-151(f). ³ From the subsequent dismissal of his appeal by the trial court and its rendering of judgment for the defendant, the plaintiff now appeals to this court.

The plaintiff argues that the defendant board's refusal to accept the decision and recommendations of the impartial hearing panel was an abuse of its discretion. We do not agree. Under Catino v. Board of Education, 174 Conn. 414, 417, 389 A.2d 754 (1978), the defendant board was bound by the panel's findings of fact but not by its legal conclusions or by its recommendations. The panel found facts in substantiation of the plaintiff's conviction and of the procedures that led to his termination, and nothing else. "The jurisdiction and discretion to determine what ... may be (due and sufficient cause) rests in the hands of the school authorities." Tucker v. Board of Education, 177 Conn. 572, 578, 418 A.2d 933 (1979). Although its discretion is not unfettered; see id.; the defendant board could properly conclude, on the basis of testimony in the record, that conviction of a felony constituted due and sufficient cause under § 10-151(b)(6) to terminate the plaintiff's employment.

There is no error.

1 General Statutes § 10-151(b) provides in relevant part: "Beginning with and subsequent to the fourth year of continuous employment of a teacher by a board of education, the contract of employment of a teacher shall be renewed from year to year, except that it may be terminated at any time for one or more of the following reasons: ... or (6) other due...