Wilkinson v. Cochran
| Decision Date | 31 January 2020 |
| Docket Number | 2180741 |
| Citation | 299 So.3d 970 |
| Parties | Roger WILKINSON v. Kelly COCHRAN, individually and in her official capacity as a member of the Gadsden City Board of Education, et al. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Civil Appeals |
Shaun Malone of The Malone Law Firm, Gadsden; and Sam Heldman of The Gardner Firm, Washington, D.C., for appellant.
Joshua B. Sullivan of Knowles & Sullivan, LLC, Gadsden, for appellee.
Roger Wilkinson, a former principal of a Gadsden elementary school, was suspended from his position for 20 days without pay for a certain post he made on Facebook, a social-media Web site. As a result, Wilkinson filed a civil action against the Gadsden City Board of Education ("the board"); the members of the board, Kelly Cochran, Frank Cylar, Mike Haney, Deborah Howard, Nancy Stewart, Lynn Taylor, and Wayne Watts (hereinafter collectively referred to as "the board members"); and Ed Miller, the Gadsden superintendent of education. The action was against the board members and Miller in both their official and their individual capacities. In the action, Wilkinson sought "appropriate declaratory, mandamus and injunctive relief" ordering that he be "reinstated" and reimbursed $6,897.67, plus interest, for that portion of his salary he did not receive during the suspension. Wilkinson also sought to have the allegations against him removed from his personnel file "or other files existing" regarding him.
The board, the board members, and Miller moved to dismiss Wilkinson's action on the grounds that the complaint failed to state a claim pursuant to which relief could be granted and that Wilkinson's claims were barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity. After a hearing, on May 19, 2017, the trial court entered an order dismissing the claims against the board and against Miller and the board members in their official capacities. In the order, the trial court noted that Wilkinson had conceded that the board had immunity.1 The trial court allowed the claims against Miller and the board members in their individual capacities to go forward and permitted discovery regarding their "rationale and reasoning" in deciding to suspend Wilkinson. After discovery was completed, Miller and the board members moved for a summary judgment. Wilkinson opposed the motion. A hearing was held on the motion, and, on April 12, 2019, the trial court entered a summary judgment as to the claims asserted against Miller and the board members in their individual capacities, stating that it had considered the parties arguments and had concluded that there were no genuine issues of material fact and that the board members and Miller were entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. On April 26, Wilkinson filed a motion to alter, amend, or vacate the summary judgment. That motion was denied on May 3, 2019. Wilkinson timely appealed from both the order of dismissal and the summary judgment insofar as they disposed of his claims against Miller and the board members.
The evidence submitted in support of the motion for a summary judgment indicates the following.2 Wilkinson began working as the principal of R.A. Mitchell Elementary School in February 2014. Wilkinson had a personal page on the Facebook social-media Web site on which he stated that he was the principal of the school. He also posted school announcements such as closings on his personal page. In his affidavit, Miller testified that, in January 2016, he received an anonymous complaint about certain posts on Wilkinson's personal Facebook page. The complaint included copies of the posts, several of which included pictures of guns and people holding guns. Miller stated that he asked Wilkinson to meet with the board members during the board's meeting in February 2016. At that meeting, Miller said, the content and nature of the posts were discussed, and Wilkinson "was warned about inappropriate postings which might be misinterpreted to be violent or divisive." Miller also said that he made clear to Wilkinson that "any future issues could result in discipline." In his deposition, Wilkinson said that, at the February 2016 meeting, he assured the board members and Miller that he would use better judgment on future posts and that there would be no more problems with his posts.
Donald J. Trump was elected president of the United States on November 8, 2016. On November 10, 2016, Wilkinson took a picture of the food on his school-lunch tray and, during school hours, posted the picture to his personal Facebook page with the following comment: "All I can say is Trump was elected 2 days ago and we already have actual white flour American rolls in the lunchroom instead of the Communist wheat bread that's been served for the past few years #MAGA" ("the Facebook post").3 Miller stated in his affidavit that, the same day, he received several complaints regarding the Facebook post. On the night of November 10, 2016, Miller said, he contacted Wilkinson and told him that he had received "negative feedback" regarding the Facebook post. Miller said that he asked Wilkinson to delete the Facebook post. Wilkinson complied with Miller's request.
At Miller's request, Wilkinson met with Miller and other board officials on November 15, 2016. Miller told Wilkinson that the Facebook post had caused problems and had resulted in negative feedback. Miller then gave Wilkinson a letter explaining that Wilkinson was being placed on administrative leave for four days pending an investigation.
Wilkinson testified in his deposition that, on November 28, 2016, he received a second letter from Miller. In the second letter, Miller advised Wilkinson that Miller was recommending to the board that Wilkinson be suspended for 20 days without pay. According to the letter, the recommendation was based on an inappropriate Facebook post made during school hours and "[n]egligence of prior warnings on inappropriate activity on social media." Wilkinson was further advised that the board would consider the recommendation at its December 6, 2016, meeting and that Wilkinson had a right to attend the meeting and be heard. In his deposition, Wilkinson said that, at the meeting, he apologized and acknowledged that the Facebook post was a mistake, telling the board he should have used better judgment and saying he would remove his Facebook page. Wilkinson also told the board that the Facebook post "was taken by individuals in a way that was not meant." There was evidence indicating that some people who complained about the Facebook post believed that the references to white bread and wheat bread were racial in nature. Wilkinson said that he told the board that the post was not meant to be
Wilkinson acknowledged to the board that there should be consequences for the Facebook post, but he disagreed that a 20-day suspension was warranted. Instead, Wilkinson said that he believed that the four-day suspension was adequate discipline.
On December 8, 2016, Miller sent Wilkinson a letter informing him that the board had approved Miller's recommendation that Wilkinson be suspended for 20 work days without pay. The suspension was to run from November 15, 2016, and conclude on January 3, 2017. Wilkinson was to return to work on January 4, 2017.
In his deposition, Wilkinson was asked whether he was aware that the Facebook post had "caused problems and a disruption for the Gadsden City Board of Education" and whether he was aware that the Facebook post had "caused a negative reflection upon" his school. Wilkinson responded "[m]ost definitely" to both questions. He also said that he had no evidence indicating that Miller or any of the board members had acted out of any ill will or malice in imposing the suspension, although he had alleged that in his complaint.
On December 27, 2016, Wilkinson filed the instant action, which resulted in the dismissal order and the summary judgment, discussed above, from which he has appealed.
Although the parties did not raise the issue of this court's jurisdiction over this appeal, because Bryant v. Flagstar Enters., Inc., 717 So. 2d 400, 401 (Ala. Civ. App. 1998).
From the record before us, we cannot determine whether Wilkinson falls within that definition. However, Wilkinson has never asserted that he is not subject to the SFA, and we are not called upon to decide the issue of the applicability of the SFA in this case. Therefore, we, too, will review this case under the SFA.
Under the SFA, a superintendent of a city board of education is included within the definition of "chief executive officer." § 16-24C-3(1). The "governing board" is defined as "[t]he body of elected or appointed officials that is granted authority by law, regulation, or policy to make employment decisions on behalf of the employer." § 16-24C-3(5). The "employer" is "[t]he entity,...
To continue reading
Request your trial