Warren v. Bd. of Sch. Trs. of the Springs Valley Cmty. Sch. Corp.
| Decision Date | 30 December 2015 |
| Docket Number | No. 59A01–1506–PL–617.,59A01–1506–PL–617. |
| Citation | 49 N.E.3d 559 |
| Parties | Risha D. WARREN, Appellant–Plaintiff, v. BOARD OF SCHOOL TRUSTEES OF the SPRINGS VALLEY COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION, Appellee–Defendant. |
| Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
Daniel L. Brown, Daniel L. Brown Law Office, P.C., Salem, IN, Attorney for Appellant.
Douglas A. Hoffman, Jeremy M. Dilts, Carson Boxberger LLP, Bloomington, IN, Attorneys for Appellee.
, Judge.
[1] Risha Warren filed a complaint against the Board of School Trustees of the Springs Valley Community School Corporation (“School Board”), alleging violations of Indiana's Open Door Law, breach of contract, and defamation. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the School Board. Warren appeals, raising the following restated issues: 1) whether the trial court erred in granting summary judgment; and 2) whether the trial court erred in denying her motion to compel. Concluding the trial court erred by granting summary judgment in favor of the School Board as to the Open Door Law claim, we reverse and remand for further proceedings on that claim. On the remaining claims we affirm the grant of summary judgment in favor of the School Board. As for Warren's motion to compel, we conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion and affirm the trial court's denial of the motion. We therefore affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.
[2] From August 2008 to December 2012, Warren was employed as a second grade teacher at Springs Valley Elementary School. On November 16, 2012, Warren administered a “matching” test to her students. Appellant's Appendix at 472. One student, whom Warren believed “was not performing to her best potential,” completed the test by drawing lines straight across the page. Id. at 123. The student “ma[de] no effort to do the test correctly.” Id. When Warren discovered the student's lack of effort, she took the student to see the school principal. On the way to the principal's office, another teacher heard Warren say she was going to “kill” the student. Id. at 305. Warren was “crying and upset” when she entered the principal's office. Id. at 328. She demanded to see an administrator and told the secretaries, “If you don't get me an administrator now, I'm going to kill her!” Id. The secretaries did not believe Warren's threat was credible, but they arranged for Warren to go home early.
[3] On November 26, the school principal provided Warren with notice of the school's preliminary decision to terminate her employment. See Ind.Code § 20–28–7.5–2
(). The notice cited a school rule providing for the immediate suspension or dismissal of an employee who has engaged in “threats and/or acts of violence, fighting or attempting bodily injury to another while on school property or school sponsored functions.” Appellant's App. at 467. Warren requested a private conference with Superintendent Todd Pritchett, which was held two days later on November 28. The following day, Superintendent Pritchett issued a written recommendation to the School Board that Warren's employment be terminated.
, and your timely made written request for a private conference with the School Board, the Board of School Trustees of Springs Valley School Corporation will confer with you at a private conference to be held at an Executive Session of the School Board beginning at 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, December 20, 2012, at the Springs Valley Teaming Center located at 479 South Tarry Bird Blvd., Trench Tick, Indiana 47432. A special meeting of the Board will be held following the Executive Session. After the private conference, and at a special meeting of the Board, the Board of School Trustees is expected to make a determination as to your status as a teacher at the Springs Valley Elementary School.
[5] In addition, the School Board gave the following public notice of the meeting:
[6] On December 20, the School Board convened and conducted the private conference during an executive session. Warren attended with her attorney, Michael Kendall, and her union representative, Sandra Steele. The private conference portion was “quite long.” Id. at 121. The School Board heard testimony from nine different witnesses and received twelve exhibits.
After the private conference, the School Board retired to deliberate. During deliberations, Warren, Kendall, and Steele waited in a separate room down the hall. At some point, the School Board's attorney entered the room where Warren was waiting “to offer her a package that would have allowed her to keep her position.” Id. Warren made a counteroffer and “remained in the room down the hall, expecting to hear again from the school board attorney.” Id. Deliberations continued for hours, but Warren did not receive another offer from the School Board. Warren requested the public meeting portion be rescheduled due to the length of the proceedings and the lateness of the hour, but she did not receive a response. Then, at approximately 2:30 A.M., Warren noticed through a window that cars were leaving the parking lot outside.
[7] The School Board had concluded the executive session and held a public meeting to vote on Warren's termination. The School Board did not notify Warren that the executive session had ended. The meeting memorandum indicates the School Board “met in Regular Session at 2:25 A.M. on December 21, 2012” and voted to dismiss Warren prior to adjourning at 2:33 A.M. Id. at 485. The motion to terminate Warren's contract “passed by the vote of 4–0–3,” with three board members abstaining. Id.
[8] Several members of the public attended the meeting, including Warren's stepmother and sister, but Warren did not attend because she was unaware the meeting was taking place. The School Board signaled the beginning of the meeting by opening the doors and sending someone into the hallway to make an announcement. Members of the public were congregating in the “common area” of the building. Id. at 192. One board member recalled, “I think that the restroom passes by where the public was so I believe that a few board members walked out to go to the restroom and informed the public.” Id. at 145.
[9] Warren subsequently filed a claim for unemployment benefits. A claims deputy found Warren was discharged for just cause and thus ineligible for benefits. The Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development affirmed the denial of benefits, and this court affirmed the Review Board's determination in Warren v. Review Bd. of Ind. Dep't of Workforce Dev., No. 93A02–1311–EX–949, 2014 WL 1390567
.
[10] Warren also filed a complaint alleging violations of Indiana's Open Door Taw. See Ind.Code § 5–14–1.5–1
to –8. The complaint requested a declaratory judgment voiding the final action taken by the School Board at the December 21st meeting and injunctive relief reinstating Warren's teacher contract. The School Board filed a motion for summary judgment and designated evidence in support, including our decision affirming the Review Board's determination denying Warren unemployment benefits. Warren later amended her complaint by adding two additional counts alleging breach of contract and defamation. The School Board filed a Notice to the Court Regarding Summary Judgment, which stated its previously filed motion for summary judgment and designations were dispositive of all of Warren's claims, including the newly added ones.
[11] Warren filed a response to the School Board's motion and designated evidence in opposition to summary judgment. Thereafter, the trial court held a hearing on the motion for summary judgment. After the hearing, Warren filed supplemental designations, but the School Board promptly moved to strike the supplemental designations. The trial court granted the School Board's motion to strike and motion for summary judgment on May 26, 2015. The order granting the School Board's motion for summary judgment stated this court's decision affirming the determination that Warren was discharged for just cause collaterally estopped the breach of contract claim. This appeal followed.
[12] Warren contends the trial court erred in granting the School Board's motion for summary judgment. We review the grant of summary judgment de novo. Lyons v. Richmond Cmty. Sch. Corp., 19 N.E.3d 254, 259 (Ind.2014)
. Our review is limited to those facts designated to the trial court, Ind. Trial Rule 56(H), and we construe all facts and reasonable inferences drawn from those facts in favor of the non-moving party, Meredith v. Pence, 984 N.E.2d 1213, 1218 (Ind.2013). We will affirm a grant of summary judgment only if the designated evidence shows there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. T.R. 56(C). On appeal, the non-moving party carries the burden of persuading us the grant of summary judgment was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Terry v. Gary Cmty. Sch. Corp.
...the Defendant's final action to terminate the Plaintiff should be declared void. For support, she relies on Warren v. Board of School Trustees, 49 N.E.3d 559 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015), where the court voided a school board's final action to terminate a plaintiff teacher due to an Open Door Law v......
-
Vician v. Greenebaum
...Valley Comm. Sch. Corp., 49 N.E.3d 559, 564 (Ind.Ct.App. 2015). The Court's review is limited to those facts designated to the trial court. Id. Summary judgment is affirmed where the designated evidence shows there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to jud......