Opinion ID: 1703265
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Letter of Appointment Temporary/Part-Time Employee Alabama Southern Community College

Text: The letter stated in pertinent part: The purpose of this letter is to offer you an appointment with Alabama Southern Community College as Project Quest Specialist at a rate of compensation equivalent to a full-time annual salary of $12,500.00 beginning effective September 1, 1996. This rate of compensation is based on a local salary schedule. Any compensation paid to you under this appointment shall be subject to withholding for (1) State and Federal income tax, (2) FICA contributions, (3) Alabama Teachers Retirement System contribution, and (4) such other deductions as you may properly designate. Pursuant to State law and the policies, rules, and regulations of the State of Alabama Board of Education, your employment in the above position shall be probationary and shall be `at will' to be continued or discontinued, with or without cause, at the discretion of the President of the College. In the event the President shall decide to discontinue your employment, you will receive written notice of such no later than fifteen (15) days prior to the effective date of the discontinuation of employment. You may accept this offer by signing your name in the space indicated below and returning this letter to my office within five days of your receipt of this letter. (Please also keep a copy for your records.) Should you accept this appointment, you will have a duty to take all reasonable action necessary to keep yourself fully aware at all times of, and fully abide by, all applicable rules, regulations, and procedures of the College and the State Board of Education, regardless of whether such rules, regulations, and procedures are recorded in an employee handbook or other college publication, stated in other written form, or stated orally to employees in general or to you in particular [emphasis added]. Should you accept the above-referenced appointment, your job duties and responsibilities will be those described in your job description and made a part hereof [emphasis added]. Congratulations upon your selection for this appointment. I am hopeful that you will find your employment here to be a rewarding experience. Primary location (for travel purposes): Thomasville Immediate Supervisor [emphasis added]: John White Dean: Ann Clanton (Emphasis in original except where noted.) This letter was signed by Johnson and was dated September 26, 1996. The Board contends that the president of Alabama Southern reserved the right of control over Johnson, which, it argues, is unambiguously expressed in the Letter of Appointment. Brief of Appellees, at 20. The record also contains copies of Johnson's W-2 Wage and Tax Statement forms for 1997-98. According to these forms, she was paid $12,578.75 in 1997 and $13,200.39 in 1998. Regarding the services Johnson performed for Alabama Southern, she testified as follows: Q. [By counsel for the Board] Now, Ms. Johnson, what do you do at Alabama Southern Community College for which you receive the salaries? Well, I would like to call it salary, but I guess it is wages and compensation. If I may, let's start for 1997. What did you do at Alabama Southern to earn $12,578.75? A. [By Johnson] I performed services on two high school campuses, what we had one time referred to as disadvantaged students. They are now labeled as at-risk students. These are students that have potential for going into college. I do assistance in college admission procedures, ACT testing, and financial aid. Q. For 1998, it shows that you received [approximately] $13,200. What did you do in 1998 to receive that type of compensation? A. I performed exactly the same aforementioned services. Q. Today is April something 1999. Are you currently performing the same duties, say, from January to April of this year, 1999? A. Yes, I do. Q. There have been some questions about funding sources for the moneys that you receive and that it might be a part of some federal grant.... Did you hear that testimony? . . . . A. The entire source of my income is from [funds from a federal grant], yes. Q. But your paycheck, and can I assume that the only paycheck you ever receive is one that has Alabama Southern on it? A. That's correct. Alabama Southern is the fiscal agent for that particular federal grant. (Reporter's Transcript, at 74-76.) Johnson further testified that she does not report to Alabama Southern or work on the campus, but, instead, goes directly from home to high schools [to] perform a service there. Also, she testified: Q. [By her counsel] No one at Alabama Southern controls anything that you do? A. [By Johnson] No. No more than I work on a federal program. I am sure there is a program designed [that] they have at that campus, because that is where I work from. . . . . Q. They don't have control over howyou perform it according to the federal expectations? A. Yes, I perform according to what is referred to as a program design. (Reporter's Transcript, at 79-82.) In short, the record is replete with oral testimony, including the testimony of Donald Kelly, director of information services for the Department of Postsecondary Education, as well as documentary evidence, on this disputed issue. The weight to be accorded such testimony was a matter for the trial court. Thus, that court's factual conclusions are subject to the presumptions attendant upon the ore tenus standard of review. Under this evidence, we hold that the trial court's conclusion that Johnson was an employee of Alabama Southern was not clearly erroneous and against the great weight of the evidence. Raidt v. Crane, 342 So.2d 358, 360 (Ala. 1977). Johnson insists that, even if the trial court correctly held her to be ineligible to occupy her position on the Board, it erred in removing her forthwith. This is so, because, she contends, she should be able to cure her disability by voluntarily terminating her employment within a reasonable time. For the following reasons, we disagree with that contention. Superficially, Johnson's contention seems consistent with our holding in Part I of this opinion. However, the Board's case against Johnson differs from that against Parker in one important respect, namely, that Johnson still had a working relationship with a postsecondary education institution when the judgment in this case was entered. The dispositive question thus becomes whether the fact that Johnson was still employed by Alabama Southern at the time the trial court entered its judgment necessitates a result different from the one reached in Parker's case. We conclude that it does. This was a quo warranto action, and, consequently, it is subject to the provisions of Ala.Code 1975, §§ 6-6-590 to -604. In particular, it was subject to § 6-6-600, which provides in pertinent part:  When a defendant ... against whom such action has been conmmenced[commenced], is adjudged guilty of usurping or intruding into, or unlawfully holding or exercising, any office or franchise or unlawfully practicing any profession, judgment must be entered that such defendant be excluded from the office or franchise or be prohibited from practicing such profession and that the plaintiff recover costs against such defendant. (Emphasis added.) Section § 6-6-600 is clear on its face and its application unavoidable: if, at the time a defendant in a quo warranto action is adjudged guilty of ... unlawfully holding... any office, she is, in fact, ineligible to hold such office, judgment must be entered, thus vacating the office. The imposition of exclusion attaches at the time the judgment is entered. In other words, such a defendant may not cure her disability by terminatingpostjudgmenther disability-causing employment. Specifically, because Johnson was employed by Alabama Southern at the time she was adjudicated to be ineligible, she cannot now cure her disability by terminating her employment. [4] The trial court properly removed Johnson from the Board. As it relates to Johnson, therefore, the judgment is affirmed.