Opinion ID: 1920706
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 10

Heading: was the board's decision clearly erroneous, based upon a review of all the evidence?

Text: On appeal before the circuit court, Strain claimed that the Board's decision to terminate was arbitrary, capricious or an abuse of discretion. The circuit court affirmed the Board holding there is substantial evidence to support the school board's decision. Strain correctly argues that the trial court improperly used the substantial evidence, rather than the clearly erroneous standard in determining whether the Board's decision was arbitrary, capricious or characterized by an abuse of discretion. The clearly erroneous standard is the proper standard for review of school board decisions. Dale v. Board of Ed., etc., 316 N.W.2d 108 (S.D.1982); Tschetter v. Doland Bd. of Ed., etc., 302 N.W.2d 43 (S.D.1981). Despite application of the wrong standard, the circuit court reached the right result. An appeal from a school board's decision is not a trial de novo in the true sense of the phrase. The appeal has the limited function of receiving evidence for determining the legality, and not the propriety, of the school board's decision. Moran v. Rapid City Area School Dst., 281 N.W.2d 595, 598 (S.D.1979). School boards are creatures of the legislature and are a part of the legislative branch of government. Therefore, the judiciary may not invade the province of the school board's decision making unless such decision making is done contrary to law. Id. at 598. The proper scope of review for this court is the same as that of the trial court. We are not bound by a presumption that the trial court's decision is correct. Tschetter, supra, 302 N.W.2d at 46 (S.D.1981). The question for us on appeal, under the clearly erroneous standard is not whether we would have made the same decision as the school board, but whether, after reviewing the entire record, we are left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. Tschetter, supra ; Matter of South Lincoln Rural Water System, 295 N.W.2d 743 (S.D.1980). The outcome of this case is based almost entirely on a resolution of who and what to believe. The Board had an opportunity to observe the witnesses and judge their credibility. The Board obviously believed A.S. and the evidence supporting her testimony. After reviewing the entire record, this court is not left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed in this case. The decision of the Board is not clearly erroneous, nor is it arbitrary, capricious or characterized by an abuse of discretion.