Title: CAMPBELL v. INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 01 OF OKLMULGEE COUNTY

State: oklahoma

Issuer: Oklahoma Supreme Court

Document:

CAMPBELL v. INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 01 OF OKLMULGEE COUNTY  CAMPBELL v. INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 01 OF OKLMULGEE COUNTY 2003 OK 73 77 P.3d 1034 Case Number: 97513 Decided: 09/16/2003 THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA THURBERT A. CAMPBELL, Plaintiff/Appellee/Counter-Appellant, v. INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 01 OF OKMULGEE COUNTY, STATE OF OKLAHOMA, a/k/a OKMULGEE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, Defendant/Appellant/Counter-Appellee. ON CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS, DIVISION IV ¶0 Thurbert A. Campbell brought an action against the Okmulgee Public Schools in the District Court, Okmulgee County, John Maley, trial judge, for unpaid wages and liquidated damages. Plaintiff alleged that upon retirement he was entitled under his employment contract to reimbursement for forty-five and one-half (45½) days of accumulated, unused sick leave in the amount of $9,289.74. Defendant conceded that it owed plaintiff reimbursement for eighteen (18) days and paid him $3,675.06, but denied owing him for the other twenty-seven and one-half (27½) days. Defendant also denies that it is liable for liquidated damages. On counter-motions for summary adjudication, the trial court gave judgment to plaintiff on the sick leave claim and gave judgment to defendant on the liquidated damages claim. Both parties appealed. The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment for plaintiff, but reversed the judgment for defendant on the claim for liquidated damages, remanding it with directions to enter judgment for plaintiff. On certiorari upon defendant's petition, THE COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS' OPINION IS VACATED; THE TRIAL COURT'S JUDGMENT IS AFFIRMED. Richard B. Wilkinson, OKLAHOMA EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, for Plaintiff/Appellee/Counter-Appellant. J. Douglas Mann and William A. Caldwell, ROSENSTEIN, FIST & RINGOLD, Tulsa, Oklahoma, for Defendant/Appellant/Counter-Appellee. OPALA, V.C.J. ¶1 The dispositive questions tendered on certiorari are (1) Does the contract for the 2000-2001 school year between the Okmulgee Public Schools and its teachers entitle plaintiff, who retired at the end of the school year, to be reimbursed for all the unused sick leave days he accumulated in excess of one hundred twenty (120) days? and if so (2) Is defendant liable for liquidated damages for its refusal to fully reimburse plaintiff for all the excess, unused sick leave he had accumulated? We answer the first question in the affirmative and the second in the negative. I ANATOMY OF LITIGATION ¶2 The Okmulgee Public Schools (defendant) and the Okmulgee Association of Classroom Teachers entered into an agreement effective the first day of the 2000-2001 school year governing their mutual rights and obligations (the Agreement). Among its provisions are two paragraphs concerning the disposition upon retirement of an employee's accumulated, unused sick leave. The first states: "Sick leave days may be cumulative up to a maximum total of one hundred twenty (120) days. . . . Any unused sick leave days in excess of the one hundred twenty (120) days is irrevocably transferred to the individual employees (sic) sick leave retirement bank and may be used for retirement purposes only." Several paragraphs later, the Agreement states: "A teacher who has his/her last ten consecutive years of service in the Okmulgee Public Schools prior to retirement will be paid for all unused sick leave above one hundred twenty (120) days at the teacher's per diem rate when he/she retires from the school system." ¶3 In addition to the two quoted paragraphs of the Agreement, the disposition of unused sick leave accumulated by a retiring employee is also addressed in a policy adopted by the Board of Education in 1998. That policy states: "Employees of [the] Okmulgee School District upon retirement will be compensated at their per diem rate for any and all unused sick leave above one hundred twenty days (120). ADOPTED: May 12, 1998." ¶4 Thurbert A. Campbell (plaintiff) taught in the Okmulgee Public Schools for more than ten (10) consecutive years before retiring at the end of the 2000-2001 school year. During his tenure as a teacher, plaintiff accumulated one hundred sixty-five and one-half (1651/2) days of unused sick leave. He informed defendant in March 2001 that based on the terms of the Agreement he expected to be reimbursed at his per diem rate for forty-five and one-half (451/2) of those days. The school district conceded that he was owed for eighteen (18) days, but rejected his claim for the other twenty-seven and one-half (27½) days. Defendant notified plaintiff in writing of its decision and paid him at the end of the school year for the eighteen (18) days it conceded he was owed. ¶5 Plaintiff then brought this action in which he seeks judgment for the monetary value of the twenty-seven and one-half (27½) days of accumulated, unused sick leave withheld by defendant and for liquidated damages for defendant's failure to pay wages when due as authorized by the provisions of 40 O.S. 2001 §165.3(B).2 Defendant denies that plaintiff is entitled to (1) payment for any additional days of unused sick-leave and (2) to liquidated damages even if he prevails in his reimbursement claim. ¶6 Plaintiff and defendant both moved for summary adjudication. The trial court gave judgment to plaintiff on the reimbursement claim and gave judgment to defendant on the liquidated damages claim. Both parties appealed. The Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, affirmed the judgment for plaintiff, reversed that for defendant (on the liquidated damages claim), and remanded the cause with directions to enter judgment for plaintiff on the latter claim as well. ¶7 We granted certiorari on defendant's petition and now vacate the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals and affirm the trial court's judgment. II STANDARD OF REVIEW ON SUMMARY PROCESS ¶8 Summary process--a special pretrial procedural track pursued with the aid of acceptable probative substitutes3 -- is a search for undisputed material facts which, sans forensic combat, may be utilized in the judicial decision-making process.4 Summary process is applied where neither the material facts nor any inferences that may be drawn from uncontested facts are in dispute and where the law favors the movant's claim or liability-defeating defense. To that end, the court may consider, in addition to the pleadings, items such as depositions, affidavits, admissions, answers to interrogatories, as well as other evidentiary materials which are offered by the parties in acceptable form.5 Only those evidentiary materials which eliminate from trial some or all fact issues on the merits of the claim or defense afford legitimate support for nisi prius resort to summary adjudication.6 ¶9 Summary relief issues stand before us for de novo examination. III THE AGREEMENT ENTITLES PLAINTIFF TO PAYMENT FOR ALL ACCUMULATED, UNUSED SICK LEAVE IN EXCESS OF ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY DAYS ¶10 Two paragraphs of Article 21 of the Agreement address the disposition of an employee's accumulated, unused sick leave upon retirement. The first states: "Sick leave days may be cumulative up to a maximum total of one hundred twenty (120) days. . . . Any unused sick leave days in excess of the one hundred twenty (120) days is irrevocably transferred to the individual employees (sic) sick leave retirement bank and may be used for retirement purposes only." (the retirement bank clause) Several paragraphs later, the Agreement states: "A teacher who has his/her last ten consecutive years of service in the Okmulgee Public Schools prior to retirement will be paid for all unused sick leave above one hundred twenty (120) days at the teacher's per diem rate when he/she retires from the school system." (the reimbursement clause) ¶11 There is no dispute (1) that plaintiff spent the last ten (10) consecutive years in the service of the Okmulgee Public Schools and (2) that he accumulated a total of one hundred sixty-five and one-half (165½) days of unused sick leave prior to the date of his retirement. Plaintiff relies on the reimbursement clause of the Agreement, which he asserts clearly and unambiguously entitles him to be paid for all the sick leave he accumulated in excess of one hundred twenty (120) days. ¶12 Defendant argues that both the retirement bank clause and the reimbursement clause apply to plaintiff and that one directly contradicts the other. Defendant urges that the court can and must reconcile the conflicting provisions and that the key to that endeavor is to be found in the sick leave reimbursement policy adopted by the Board in 1998. That policy states: "Employees of [the] Okmulgee School District upon retirement will be compensated at their per diem rate for any and all unused sick leave above one hundred twenty days (120). ADOPTED: May 12, 1998." (the sick leave reimbursement policy) ¶13 Defendant argues that prior to the adoption of the sick leave reimbursement policy, the disposition of unused sick leave was governed solely by the (then extant version of the) retirement bank clause of the Agreement, which controlled (and continues to control) the disposition of all unused sick leave days accumulated before the sick leave reimbursement policy was adopted.11 Under that provision all sick leave days in excess of one hundred twenty (120) days were "irrevocably" transferred to the individual employee's retirement bank to be used for retirement purposes only.12 Defendant contends that reimbursement of unused sick leave is not a retirement purpose, that phrase being limited to the credit toward retirement provided by the terms of 70 O.S. 2001 §17-116.2(H). ¶14 In 1998 defendant decided that it would offer teachers payment for some of their unused sick leave in excess of one hundred twenty (120) days in place of the Agreement's negotiated arrangement for the transfer of all of those days to the employee's retirement bank. Accordingly, the school district adopted the sick leave reimbursement policy on 12 May 1998. According to defendant, the retirement bank clause of the Agreement and the sick leave reimbursement policy work together in the following way. Any sick leave days accumulated before the adoption of the policy, having been irrevocably transferred to the individual employee's retirement bank before the policy was adopted, remain subject to the retirement bank clause of the Agreement and are unavailable for reimbursement purposes. Any unused sick leave days accumulated after the policy's adoption can be reimbursed as provided by the policy. ¶15 Turning to the Agreement's reimbursement clause,13 defendant argues that if that clause is considered alone in relation to the retirement bank clause, the two clauses are irreconcilably in conflict. This is so, defendant contends, because unused sick leave days cannot be both irrevocably transferred to a retirement bank for the purpose of credit toward retirement and thereafter still be retrievable for reimbursement. In short, for the retirement bank clause to mean what it says, the reimbursement clause cannot literally mean what it says. Defendant then argues that the repugnancy can be cured only by resort to the sick leave reimbursement policy. Defendant proposes that the reimbursement clause should simply be treated as a contractual adaptation of the sick leave reimbursement policy applicable only to sick leave accumulated after 12 May 1998. In this manner, defendant contends, both clauses of the Agreement are given effect without seriously violating the literal meaning of either. ¶16 Whether a contract is ambiguous and hence requires extrinsic evidence for its clarification is a matter of law for the court to resolve.14 There is no need to resort to extrinsic evidence to ascertain a contract's meaning where its language is clear and explicit.15 When a contract is reduced to writing, the parties' intent is to be ascertained from the writing alone whenever possible.16 Where a contract contains clauses seemingly repugnant to each other, the repugnant clauses must be reconciled if it can be done by any reasonable construction.17 ¶17 We perceive no irreconcilable conflict between the contract provisions at issue that requires resort to extrinsic evidence for its clarification or resolution. The school district and the teachers specifically contracted that the Agreement "represents the full and complete agreement between the parties." We will not look beyond the four corners of the Agreement to interpret the contract unless it is absolutely necessary. In this case it is not. The two clauses at issue simply provide nonuniform arrangements for the disposition of unused sick leave depending upon the retiring teacher's tenure with the school district. The retirement bank clause provides the general rule for the disposition of sick leave applicable to all teachers except those who qualify for participation in the reimbursement clause. The reimbursement clause provides more favorable treatment for those teachers who have served in the Okmulgee Public Schools for ten (10) consecutive years prior to retirement. The latter are eligible to receive reimbursement for their unused sick leave. ¶18 This interpretation does not conflict with the "irrevocable" nature of the transfer of excess unused sick leave days to the individual employee's retirement bank because nothing in the Agreement precludes reimbursement as a "retirement purpose." That a teacher might accumulate unused sick leave days with the intent of receiving additional compensation upon retirement is just as clearly a "retirement purpose" as receiving credit for those days. ¶19 Finally, the Agreement does not make the distinction defendant posits between days accumulated before 12 May 1998 and those accumulated after that date. If it had been the parties' intent to limit reimbursement in the manner defendant proposes, it would have been a simple matter to do so either by an explicit statement to that effect or by including in the Agreement a reference to the sick leave reimbursement policy. ¶20 Plaintiff had at least ten (10) years of consecutive service with the school district on the date of his retirement. He is hence entitled to be paid for "all unused sick leave in excess of one hundred twenty (120) days." That portion of the trial court's judgment is affirmed. IV PLAINTIFF IS NOT ENTITLED TO LIQUIDATED DAMAGES ¶21 Pursuant to the provisions of ¶22 The Court of Civil Appeals held that the legislature did not intend for employers to avoid liability for liquidated damages based on a subjective interpretation of the meaning of an employment contract. COCA instead adopted an objective standard and, applying it to the undisputed material facts, held that there was no objective basis in the record to support the existence of a bona fide disagreement over the reimbursement of plaintiff's pre-1998 sick leave days. ¶23 The fundamental rule of statutory construction is to ascertain and give effect to the legislative intent. ¶24 In order to justify punishing the employer for failure to pay all wages when due, he (or she) should be to some degree blameworthy for the offending conduct. We hence hold that a bona fide disagreement exists within the meaning of §165.4 if the employer holds an honest and sincere belief that the wages claimed are not owed. ¶25 The undisputed facts in the summary process record not only fail to establish as a matter of law that defendant acted without an honest and sincere belief that the wages claimed were not owed, but on the contrary are legally sufficient for summary adjudication of this issue in defendant's favor. The retirement bank clause and the reimbursement clause of the Agreement could be perceived as in conflict if viewed within the context of previous contracts and the sick leave reimbursement policy. V SUMMARY ¶26 The employment contract between defendant and its teachers for the 2000-2001 school year contains two clauses governing the disposition of accumulated, unused sick leave. The clause applicable to plaintiff provides that teachers with at least ten (10) years of consecutive service in the Oklmulgee Public Schools shall be reimbursed upon retirement at their per diem rate for any and all days of accumulated, unused sick leave in excess of one hundred twenty (120) days. Plaintiff worked for the school district for at least ten (10) consecutive years and accumulated one hundred sixty-five and one-half (165½) days of unused sick leave. He is hence entitled to reimbursement for forty-five and one-half (45½) days. Defendant has paid plaintiff for eighteen (18) days. We affirm today the trial court's judgment that defendant owes plaintiff the monetary value of the remaining twenty-seven and one-half (27½) days at plaintiff's per diem rate, or $5,614.68. As to plaintiff's claim for liquidated damages, we hold that defendant's refusal to reimburse plaintiff for all the sick leave the latter claimed he was owed was based on a bona fide disagreement. Judgment on that claim was hence defendant's due. ¶27 THE COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS' OPINION IS VACATED; THE TRIAL COURT'S JUDGMENT IS AFFIRMED. ¶28 WATT, C.J., OPALA, V.C.J., and LAVENDER, HARGRAVE, KAUGER, SUMMERS, BOUDREAU, and WINCHESTER, JJ., concur. ¶29 HODGES, J., dissents. FOOT