is that a standard contract provision so that says if you have it as i read seven hundred forty four it says if you have a contract then you have certain protections under state law but i don't see anything in the statute lease that one that says you must be offered a contract for the new position it does it says you have to pardon me my name is courtney joyner representative and yes sir i would like to start work over because that's the last issue that was discussed most first thing in mons this situation is somewhat unique because you have on the school board policy retirees are entirely to continue their insurance coverage through the school system blue cross what happened in this situation was after his friend offered tired the school system continued to pay their portions of the premium as evidence in her petition for damages she was all for continue coverage she declined continue coverage in our affidavit states that the coverage would have been richer active to august the twenty fifteen has she paid her portion of the premium so it's not necessarily true covert case in the sense of there may have been a qualifying event through her retirement but the school system continue to pay your premiums and reason why it was cut all the plan administrator was because she did not pay her portion of the premiums when the air was brought out to light a cobra notice was issued to her but the school system also offered to continue her coverage had she paid her premium she not only failed to pay the premium but she also the so but how long how long was it before the school district gave her any notice between between the time that she resigned and the time that was not about fifteen months i know you're o she shows up at a doctor's appointment in september of two thousand and sixteen correct and the school board's position are it's the school systems position is that in september of two thousand and sixteen half of the printer whatever the employer share was being career and but she what had no reason to know that she was supposed to be remitting presumably to the insurance company hope fortune of the premium occur so she was damaged at least in the sense that she showed up at the doctor's office in september of two thousand and sixteen without insurance coverage and she didn't know why at this group that's from the standpoint of there was there was an error and they offered to correct the error and so as far she if there are any damages the damages could have been alleviated has she continued her coverage doesn't cobra provide for statutory damages it does for my and i was just recently addressing a decision from the fifth circuit there's a one hundred dollars per day from the standpoint of there was an error by the school system they attempted to alleviate the error and the plaintiff didn't take advantage of the opportunity it was for ford by the school system so because the statute says twenty nine u to give a coburn notice and only give a coburn notice but also too offer her that opportunity make her retiree insurance or employee employer insurance retroactive back to the date that it would have terminated mr joyner what was the nature of the parent complaint against miss randolph there were two complaints that were filed the first complaint by the same parent the first complaint was because apparently miss randolph took it upon herself to remove a student from the school system from the school the second complaint was because of a verbal dispute between it's the parent of the student who was removed from the school and is randolph well that sounds like a pretty conventional dispute over discipline you're correct so how come this never proceeded to some kind of adjudication within the school system the matter  but if you but still it seems to me the nor if i don't know i find it very difficult to understand how the woman is placed on administrative leave because of one discipline  matter she was in mr williams testified about that what they do while they investigate they placed on administrative leave with pay well every time you kick a kid out i mean every i think it's common knowledge that school systems have difficulty that he had the previous year involving a teacher so he wasn't an alternative school said he was is that in a different elementary school ok i think there's a difference between cortical where you say kicking a student student out where you fill out the paperwork and the student is removed as opposed to what happened here is you take the student without parent authority without contacting a parent put them in your car and take him home that's the differen as a dramatic difference this kid was a kindergartner and so that wasn't necessary on the circumstances so that's that's different this is not a situation where ms randolph the kid got in a fight or is accused of being out some type of making physical contact with the teacher and she takes action to remove the student through the proper procedures the policy says that you can't transport students in your eye for obvious reasons unknown vehicles so if you violate their policy as well this incident is not can participate in this investigation also miss randolph during her deposition admitted that she sent correspond corresponds to a board member regarding missing a word suicide as well and so it was the aftermath of contract and there's this business about that i quoted to mr taylor about if during the term of this contract she's offered employment a higher salary then the accept no further no further effect so it's at the school board's position that she had no contract rights during the period that she was interim principal that is  basis of a concert to destroy a plane was abandoned dr taylor decided not to take disciplinary action against her that he teacher and that's why they offered a source of employment so you're saying that she had ok so what she had was no property right in being the interim principal that is correct you know what do you do with for forty four subsection b for a room that one that says that such employment is for a temporary position more than four years and such term shall be specified in a written contract does that not impose a burden on the school system to provide her a written contract no yana not in those circumstances is it because there's a difference between interim and temporary that is correct and what does that distinction is how is it how is class it's up to the discretion of the superintendent and so and this and this situation what happened was that the teacher there are in fact randolph was circumstances where let's say for example you have five six candidates you interview not impressed with all of the candidates and you say i will make this an interim appointment or let's say for example the principal of a school the see if it will work out what i can tell you is that's the practice and there has never been an issue with anyone being terminated without any type of  process this is a unique situation and this is again by dr taylor who as you mentioned just show is not a defendant is in this cat in this case he made a decision to terminate or under the processes that he pick whatever term it says it's for certain positions you know superintendent as one term normal contracts of storms that are not less than two years but if the temporary isn't if it's temporary employment you can pick whatever term you want to pick two weeks six weeks eight weeks six months two years but everyone but it does say needs to be specified in a written contract which can team performance objectives so i'm not sure how that changing it from a temporary to an interim which is not a statutory term changes the statutory obligation correct it's been how the i also like to make the point of this the court did determine that she did not have a property interest in or in the katrina plum as a principal that decision was the right decision based on our reading of seventy four forty four but motion for summary judgment she seems it appears argue that mondale doesn't apply to school systems for some reason the court goes to a very thorough analysis the decision to terminate miss randolph was made by dr taylor who is not a policymaker on the louisiana law he is actually not even a final decision maker because his authority under for forty three is to issue what's called the interim decision the subject to review by our hearing officer also that policy only there's a distinction between her and far in so if she for example was hired without a contract if that's the custom which we don't believe that she established a cousin but if that is a custom h the process would create a deprivation and so that custom at best shows that it doesn't invoke the due process clause also your honor the last element of all no it was a single sentence in her opposition to the motion for summary judgment the moving force she did not meet any of the elements of the nail and so as i wrote in my pillar brief the existence of a property right or constitutes a violation is only part of the process the court the fact that we had to interpret the statute shows that if there was a constitutional right there right was not clearly established at the time of their lives violation and so the individual defendants would be entitled to qualified immunity also from the personal participation policies some which may have been acquired by staying low some were internal policies none of which involved the constitutional rights as well so what we have to do is you have to look at each individual defendant and so while the had no property right but you're giving their due process in the sense that you having an adjudication an investigation with which she say she didn't cooperate and that seems to me if she had no property right you wouldn't even have to do that you could just from over and say you go back to the classroom correct it yeah i mean i guess my question is could a jury look at that and say sort of backwards looking say well louisiana law seems to say she's supposed to have a contract when she's promoted but interim temporary they seem like the same thing you ought to have a contract but you didn't have a contract not you what you say no property interests but you  purport to conduct an adjudication as if she had a property interest so should that go to a jury no you're on a should should not the investigation process is because we want to be fair it was done in the interest of fair s it was done in the interests of how they process any type of grievance i mean any type of complaint that was given involving similar actions of similar employees that so compliance with that investigation policy doesn't necessarily connect to whether or not she has a property interest because janitors paraprofessionals are not entitled to contracts under louisiana law however they would be involved in that entire it's the same process as well and so it doesn't necessarily connect between that procedure with due process the law is clear that she is not tied to a contract if it's for temporary position the temporary is synonymous with interim and speculations about why he did what he did will only know the conclusions there was no investigation they didn't complete an investigation of the record clearly reflects that she's asking over and over for them to give her a chance to defend herself they were they she was not terminated you just removed from a job and then had no opportunity to explain it no opportunity the talking about complaints against her that she never had and they they never came before her they never issued any conclusions about what of those complaints or there's nothing she had no opportunity to do anything now this merger of interim and temporary is simply unfair it is now on that provision temporary on the state law is very clear about what you're supposed to do interim is invented by the school board he said east and here explaining their policy it's their policy is a school boards policy he's explained what it is and what it is is what they did they have a policy that circumvents the know she was there there were a ping her they made no act they could if she wasn't cooperating to that extent a why didn't they fire her they did they just did things and in the end cut off your salary and she had you know no choice but to resign lisa get a retirement benefits but the fact of the matter is is that interim is an invention of the east baton rouge parish school system they invented that and they invented it whether they will admit it not for a specific purpose to make sure that they could terminate people without complying with due process which is exactly what they have done in this case what the she was interim and not interim is a definition that only they know they didn't it's not in their policy written policies it is nowhere something they sprang on her you know they removed her from a job for what sounds to be minor stuff for which there could have been an explanation for which there could have been a hearing for which she could have been exonerated they chose not to and the honest i would suggest something to you says you know cows have been speculated about why they do what they do one of the reasons why they do what they do is that supposing mr dr taylor all any of these other individuals decide he wants somebody else to have a job you know you will give it to somebody and not not buy into things she did you don't see anything in the record about any adverse performance and there's nothing that she chichi chichi was a tremendous teacher she was an administrator she was appointed an assistant principal she was then promoted because i guess because of her experience and because she and won't do it and i'm going to spreading things over time you know she didn't cooperate you know toward the end of the process when it should not cooperate she's asking for hearings they're promising her hearing so we'll give you a hearing they're promising