Thombleson v. Board of School Trustees of Cent. School Dist. of Greene County, 4-1084A294

• Decision Date: 08 May 1986
• Docket Number: No. 4-1084A294,4-1084A294
• Parties: 31 Ed. Law Rep. 1242 Michael THOMBLESON, Appellant (Plaintiff Below), v. BOARD OF SCHOOL TRUSTEES OF CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT OF GREENE COUNTY, Indiana, Appellee (Defendant Below).
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court

Page 327

492 N.E.2d 327

31 Ed. Law Rep. 1242

Michael THOMBLESON, Appellant (Plaintiff Below), v. BOARD OF SCHOOL TRUSTEES OF CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT OF

GREENE COUNTY, Indiana, Appellee (Defendant Below).

No. 4-1084A294.

Court of Appeals of Indiana,

Fourth District.

May 8, 1986.

Richard J. Darko, Bradley W. Skolnik, Bayh, Tabbert & Capehart, Indianapolis, for appellant.

Robert E. Cambridge, Bloomington, for appellee.

MILLER, Judge.

Michael Thombleson appeals his dismissal as a nonpermanent teacher in the Central School District of Greene County. He alleges his dismissal was in violation of the collective bargaining agreement and the Teacher Tenure Act. We affirm.

FACTS

Thombleson was a first year nonpermanent teacher in the Central School District of Greene County. Paul R. Chambers, the high school principal for the school district, kept notes on conferences and discussions he had with Thombleson. These notes reflect that on at least six separate occasions, Chambers discussed Thombleson's classroom discipline problem with him. Two written evaluations by Chambers stated Thombleson failed to meet school standards on discipline. Moreover, a written evaluation by Superintendent Sharon Knoll stated Thombleson was deficient in, among other things, classroom discipline. Finally in a letter dated April 14, 1982, Knoll informed Thombleson his teaching contract would be considered for nonrenewal on May 20, 1982 at a meeting of the Board of School Trustees.

On April 16, 1982, Thombleson exercised his statutory right and timely requested a written statement of the reasons for the nonrenewal of his nonpermanent teacher's contract, ¹ and Knoll complied with this request in a letter dated April 19, 1982. Thombleson's letter also requested that a hearing be held on the recommendation that his nonpermanent teacher's contract should be terminated. This latter request was premised upon a fair hearing provision in Article VI, Part B of the collective bargaining agreement entered into by the Central School District and the Central Education Association of which Thombleson was a member. This portion of the agreement provided for a "fair hearing opportunity" in teacher contract terminations, and specifically stated:

"Due Process. A teacher whose contract is to be terminated shall be given a written The Board agrees that any teacher whose contract is to be terminated or not renewed shall be provided a fair hearing opportunity before the Board votes on the question of termination or non-renewal of said teacher's contract. Such hearing shall be during Executive Session and shall be between the teacher and the Board."

preliminary notice by the Superintendent of intention to terminate said teacher's contract prior to April 18.

Record, pp. 281, 305.

The School Board later discovered it had erred in scheduling the final consideration of Thombleson's contract nonrenewal for May 20, 1982, when Chambers and Knoll were informed by counsel with the Indiana School Boards Association that nonpermanent teachers must be informed of contract nonrenewal by May 1. ² The School Board rescheduled its consideration of Thombleson's contract nonrenewal for April 30, 1982. Chambers tried unsuccessfully on April 28 and 29 to inform Thombleson of the rescheduling, but was unable to notify him until the morning of April 30, 1982. Chambers explained to Thombleson the consideration date had to be rescheduled because state law required school boards to act by May 1 on all nonrenewals.

Before the April 30 meeting, Thombleson prepared and delivered a request to the School Board which stated, "Since I do not feel like I was given sufficient notice to prepare to present my case to the school board tonight, I request to appear before the board at a latter (sic) date." Record, pp. 318-19. Moreover, Thombleson personally attended the April 30, 1982 executive session and made an oral request for an extension. During the meeting, the School Board President, Gary Walker, told Thombleson that the Board was obligated to act on his contract prior to May 1. With full knowledge of the May 1 deadline, Thombleson requested two or three times that the Board grant him an extension. ³ Although the School Board granted Thombleson's request for more time and took no action on his contract, Walker testified the School Board never intended to extend Thombleson's contract through the next year by granting the extension.

On May 20, 1982, an executive session was called to consider the nonrenewal of Thombleson's contract. Both Thombleson and Chambers presented evidence on whether Thombleson's contract should be nonrenewed, and the School Board ultimately voted in open session to nonrenew Thombleson's nonpermanent teaching contract effective at the end of the 1981-82 school year. The action of the School Board was entered into the official Board minutes for May 20, 1982, and in a letter dated June 28, 1982, Chambers notified Thombleson that his contract had been nonrenewed.

On December 30, 1982, Thombleson filed a complaint in the Greene Circuit Court alleging the decision of the School Board

violated I.C. 20-6.1-4-14. His complaint also alleged that the failure of the School Board to afford him a fair hearing opportunity before it terminated his contract violated the terms of the collective bargaining agreement, and his rights under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. The trial court held the School Board had acted properly in terminating Thombleson's contract, and entered the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:

"FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Plaintiff, Michael Thombleson, is a citizen of the State of Indiana and of the United States of America, and is duly licensed and certified by the State of Indiana as a public school teacher.

2. The Defendant, Board of School Trustees of the Central School District of Greene County, Indiana, is the governing body of a public school corporation created pursuant to the laws of the State of Indiana and is authorized by those laws to operate a school system and to employ and discharge teachers.

3. Plaintiff was last employed by the Defendant during the 1981-82 school year as a nonpermanent first year teacher.

4. In a letter dated April 14, 1982, the Defendant informed the Plaintiff that his teaching contract would be considered for nonrenewal on May 20, 1982, at a meeting of the Board of School Trustees.

5. On April 16, 1982, the Plaintiff requested and on April 19, 1982, was given a statement of reason why his contract would be considered for non-renewal.

6. Plaintiff was evaluated in writing by the Defendant's agents on November 24, 1981, March 17, 1981, and April 8, 1982.

7. In the April 14, 1982 letter, the Defendant initially errored (sic) in scheduling the Board's final consideration for May 20, 1982, and thereafter rescheduled the meeting for April 30, 1982.

8. The Defendant's agent, Mr. Paul Chambers, Principal, Central High School, tried unsuccessfully on April 28 and April 29, to inform the Plaintiff of the April 30, 1982 conference, finally giving him personal notice at 10:00 a.m. on April 30, 1982.

9. Prior to the hearing and with the assistance of his counselors, the Plaintiff prepared and delivered a request to appear before the Defendant at a later date.

10. As grounds for his request, Plaintiff listed insufficient prior notice that prevented him from preparing his case.

11. The Plaintiff personally attended the April 30, 1982 executive session and made an oral request to appear at a later date.

12. At the April 30, 1982 executive session, the Plaintiff was advised by the Board President of the Defendant's obligation to act on the contract prior to May 1st.

13. On April 30, 1982, the Defendant was prepared to act on the Plaintiff's contract; the Defendant granted Plaintiff's request; and the Defendant took no action.

14. The Defendant did not intend to extend the Plaintiff's contract through the next school year by granting the Plaintiff's request to be heard at a later date.

15. The Defendant was ignorant of the fact that granting the delay could result in an additional year on the Plaintiff's contract.

16. Plaintiff and his representative personally attended the May 20, 1982 executive session of the Defendant called to consider the Plaintiff's contract.

17. At the May 20, 1982 executive session, the Defendant's high school principal discussed his written summary in support of the noncontinuation of the Plaintiff's contract.

18. At the May 20, 1982 executive session, the Plaintiff, through his representative, argued for the continuation of the Plaintiff's contract.

19. Immediately after the executive session on May 20, 1982, the Defendant met in open session and acted by a majority of the Board to cancel the Plaintiff's non-permanent teaching contract effective at the end of the 1981-82 school year.

20. Plaintiff personally attended the May 20, 1982 public session and was present when the action was taken on his contract.

21. The action of the Defendant on the Plaintiff's contract was entered into the Board minutes for May 20, 1982.

22. The last day of the 1981-82 school year was May 21, 1982.

23. Plaintiff was a member of the bargaining unit represented by the Central Education Association and was covered by the Collective Bargaining Agreement with the Defendant.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. This Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject of the cause.

2. The standards for cancellation of non-permanent teaching contracts are specifically provided in I.C. 20-6.1-4-14 and the area is preempted by that legislation to the exclusion of any preconditions established by contract.

3. 'Fair hearing opportunity of' Act (sic) VI, Part B of the Collective Bargaining Agreement is a precondition to the statutory scheme and is void.

4. By the Plaintiff's written request of April 30, 1982, and his actions at the Defendant's executive session on April 30, 1982...