Opinion ID: 1160313
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: good cause for termination

Text: When contemplating appeals pertaining to the termination of a continuing contract teacher, this court is committed to the view that not only must there be good cause and substantial evidence in support of the charges, but, in addition, the facts to sustain such charges must bear reasonable relationship to the teacher's fitness or capacity to perform his duties in that position. Powell v. Board of Trustees of Crook County School District No. 1, Wyo., 550 P.2d 1112, 1119. See, Monahan v. Board of Trustees of Elementary School District No. 9, Wyo., 486 P.2d 235, 237; and Roush v. Sweetwater County School District No. 1, Wyo., 497 P.2d 540, 542. In Board of Trustees, Laramie County School District No. 1 v. Spiegel, Wyo., 549 P.2d 1161, we addressed a situation where the district court had reversed a school board's determination, and we held `... that the only direct items of evidence against him, all of which were admitted to, and corrected, by him, were so trivial and so remote from the date of the hearing that they did not justify termination, and that to base termination on those incidents would be oppressively harsh; ...' 549 P.2d at 1177. We set out the appropriate standards for reviewing such decisions in Spiegel, and they, therefore, need not be repeated here. In the instant case, the district court entered the following findings: 1. That the finding that Plaintiff's illnesses (diabetes and ileostomy) interfered with his professional responsibility in the classroom and caused him to be absent from his classes for substantial periods of time is not supported by substantial evidence. 2. As to the finding that Plaintiff's actions in regard to Mrs. Shurley constitute insubordination, it is questionable whether the actions listed constitute insubordination, and in any event, the actions listed are not such as to constitute good cause for termination of Plaintiff's continuing contract. 3. That the finding that Plaintiff's grading was questionable is not supported by substantial evidence and to terminate his contract without further facts would be arbitrary. 4. That in regard to the finding that Plaintiff discussed his termination with students on April 3, 1975, this was a difficult time for both Plaintiff and the School District and whether Plaintiff's statements were in response to questions from students or not, there is no evidence that his statements in any way harmed the students or damaged their education and under all of the circumstances, Plaintiff's actions do not constitute good cause to terminate or suspend him.