Yanzick v. School Dist. No. 23, Lake County Mont.

• Decision Date: 01 February 1982
• Docket Number: No. 80-394,80-394
• Citation: 39 St.Rep. 191,641 P.2d 431,196 Mont. 375
• Parties: , 2 Ed. Law Rep. 1179 Tim YANZICK, Petitioner and Respondent, v. SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 23, LAKE COUNTY MONTANA et al., Appellants and Respondents.
• Court: Montana Supreme Court

Page 431

641 P.2d 431

196 Mont. 375, 2 Ed. Law Rep. 1179

Tim YANZICK, Petitioner and Respondent, v.SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 23, LAKE COUNTY MONTANA et al Appellants and Respondents.

No. 80-394.

Supreme Court of Montana.

Submitted Sept. 16, 1981.

Decided Feb. 1, 1982.

Garlington, Lohn & Robinson, Missoula, Sherman V. Lohn argued, Missoula, Boone, Karlberg & Haddon, Missoula, Sam Haddon argued, Missoula, Richard P. Heinz, County Atty., Polson, for appellants and respondents.

Datsopoulos, MacDonald & Lind, Missoula, Christopher Swartley argued, Missoula, for petitioner and respondent.

Smith Law Firm, Helena, Chadwick Smith argued, Mt. School Boards Assoc., Helena, John Larson argued, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Helena, Emilie Loring argued, Montana Education Association, Great Falls, for amicus curiae.

WEBER, Justice.

This is an appeal from the judgment of the District Court of the First Judicial District, Lewis and Clark County, dated August 22, 1980, under the Administrative Procedure Act.The District Court found for Tim Yanzick, a tenured school teacher, reversing the decision of the State Superintendent of Public Instruction.The Superintendent of Public Instruction had affirmed the decision of the Lake County Superintendent of Schools, who had affirmed the determination by the Board of Trustees of School DistrictNo. 23 not to renew Yanzick's contract.We reverse the District Court and reinstate the decisions of the State Superintendent and the County Superintendent.

The issues which we find to be determinative are:

(1) What is the standard of review which is to be applied by the County Superintendent, the State Superintendent, the District Court and this Court?

(2) Did the County Superintendent, State Superintendent, and District Court each act within its authority?

(3) Based upon the transcript and record before the reviewing agency and courts, was the decision of the County Superintendent clearly erroneous?

I.

Following are the pertinent facts disclosed by the record before the County Superintendent:

Tim Yanzick was a tenured teacher of seventh grade science and math at Polson Middle School in Lake County, Montana.He had taught there for seven years.In the fall of 1976 problems arose with regard to Yanzick's living arrangements with Sharon Scott, a fellow teacher, and with regard to various events taking place both in and out of the classroom.These will be detailed in our review of the findings of fact of the County Superintendent.In January, 1977, Dr. Christensen, Superintendent of School DistrictNo. 23, and Mr. Dupuis, the principal of Yanzick's school, met with Yanzick.There were extensive discussions which will be reviewed later.Following further conferences between Yanzick and Christensen, and upon the recommendation of Christensen, the Board of Trustees decided not to renew Yanzick's contract for the school year 1977-78.Yanzick was notified of the decision on March 15, 1977.Pursuant to Yanzick's request, the specific reasons for the Board of Trustees' decision were contained in the letter to Yanzick dated March 24, 1977.The letter sets forth the following reasons for non-renewal of Yanzick's contract as follows:

"1.The Board of Trustees believe that you have demonstrated a lack of fitness for teaching in the position in which you have been employed and such a lack of fitness as indicated in all statements made to your class of Junior High School students between the ages of 11 and 14 years, with the effect that your 'girlfriend' had to move out of your home because some people did not like your living arrangements, which statements were made under circumstances where it was common knowledge to your students and some of their parents that you and Miss Sharon Scott, a physical education teacher in the Polson School district, were living together at that time in your home in Polson, Montana.

"2.The Board of Trustees believe you have further demonstrated a lack of fitness for the teaching position in which you have been employed by reason of your introduction of the subject of abortion in your classroom, wherein you inquired of the boys in your class, ages 11 to 14, 'How many of you boys would have your girlfriend get an abortion if she were pregnant?'

"3.The Board further feels that you have also demonstrated a lack of fitness for employment in the teaching position by a serious lack of good judgment in permitting the use in your classroom of human fetuses brought by one of your students who had obtained them without authorization from St. Joseph's Hospital Laboratory without the knowledge of the administration of that hospital or of the owner of the specimens.

"4.The Board of Trustees further believe that you have demonstrated a lack of moral values by openly and notoriously cohabitating with a female teacher, not your wife, within the relatively small community of Polson, Montana, which fact, and the knowledge of which fact among your students, has adversely affected your performance as a teacher.

"5.The Board is of the opinion that you lack fitness for the classroom teaching position in which you have been employed because of the lack of respect for you as a teacher which has developed among your students as a consequence of the above-mentioned occurrances."(Hereafter the above reasons are referred to as reasons 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.)

Yanzick requested a hearing before the Board of Trustees as provided in section 20-4-204(3), MCA.His request was denied.Litigation followed, culminating in an order from the Montana Supreme Court requiring the Board of Trustees to hold a hearing and reconsider their decision.The hearing was held August 9, 1978; the Board of Trustees affirmed their original decision not to renew Yanzick's contract.Yanzick then appealed to the County Superintendent.On August 24 and 25, 1978, the County Superintendent of Schools held a hearing and extensive testimony was presented.The County Superintendent upheld the decision of the Board of Trustees not to renew the Yanzick contract.The pertinent portions of the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the County Superintendent are:

"FINDINGS OF FACT:

"...

"7.That the reasons given by the Board of Trustees of School DistrictNo. 23 for nonrenewal of the teaching contract of Appellant for the school year 1977-78 and which were reaffirmed after reconsideration hearing on August 9, 1978 were as follows: (same five reasons as previously set forth in the letter to Yanzick dated March 24, 1977) ...

"8.That during the school year 1976-77 Appellant was a seventh grade science and math teacher at the Polson Middle School DistrictNo. 23 and that his classes included approximately one hundred (100) students ranging in age from eleven (11) to fourteen (14) years and of an average age of twelve and one-half (121/2) years.

"9.That on January 18, 1977, Appellant met with Dr. Lee Christensen, Superintendent of Schools of DistrictNo. 23, and Polson Middle School Principal Darryl Dupuis and was asked why he had moved Miss Sharon Scott into his house in the city of Polson and openly lived together after he had been previously admonished about public knowledge of this living arrangement; that Appellant admitted to Dr. Christensen and Darryl Dupuis that he and Miss Sharon Scott were living together without the benefit of marriage.

"10.That at said meeting of January 18, 1977, Appellant further acknowledged that his students' knowledge of his living situation was having an adverse effect on his classroom teaching.

"11.That subsequent to the above mentioned meeting of January 18, 1977, Appellant made a statement to one of his classes regarding the fact that complaints had been registered against him by certain people in the community about his living relationship with Miss Scott and that she had moved out of his house.

"12.That Appellant has demonstrated a lack of fitness as a teacher in that his living arrangement with Miss Sharon Scott in this community had an adverse effect upon his performance as a teacher by reason that:

"a.Numerous parental complaints had been registered against Appellant during the school year with the DistrictNo. 23 Administration which necessitated District Superintendent Christensen's and Middle School Principal Dupuis' counseling of Appellant on several occasions during the 1976-77 school year; that these parental complaints stemmed either directly or indirectly from Appellant's living situation with Miss Scott.

"b.Appellant's living arrangement with Miss Scott had become a matter of public knowledge within the school community and had become a matter of discussion within his classroom thereby fostering a lack of respect for Appellant by his students.

"c.Appellant's living arrangement with Miss Scott had a negative influence upon the formation of moral judgements by his students.

"...

"14.That Appellant, by having made a statement within the context of his classes on human reproduction regarding abortion and by having displayed human fetuses to his classes on human reproduction which were voluntarily furnished to him by a student whose father was chief laboratory technician at the local hospital, has not provided the School Board with an independent basis in either instance for a finding that Appellant was unfit to be a teacher.

"15.That, though standing alone the above mentioned abortion statement and display of fetuses are insufficient grounds for dismissal, the fact that these matters had become sources of serious protest lodged by parents and had emerged as morality-oriented issues in the dismissal of Appellant is directly indicative of the fact that Appellant's living relationship with Miss Sharon Scott was having an adverse effect upon his performance as a teacher."

Pursuant to section 20-4-204(4), Yanzick appealed to the Superintendent of Public Instruction (State Superintendent).The State Superintendent considered the record without taking other...