Court Opinion

ID: 9544468
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 16:55:50.477989+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:13:03.316718
License: Public Domain

OXBERGER, Chief Judge
(dissenting).
I dissent. The reasons given for termination were not supported by a preponderance of the evidence. The complaints were directed towards Fay’s reprimands to his students. The principal thought these reprimands were too loud, lecturesome and harassing. Three parents speculated their children’s dislikes and tensions about school were caused by Fay. Differences of opinion as to teaching or discipline methods by the administration do not equal unacceptable behavior to justify termination. Neither does speculative, second-hand testimony of parents. The only valid reason for termination, namely, physical handling of a student, was met by Fay’s explanation of the situation.
Fay was not apprised of past complaints when they occurred. This notification is the responsibility of the principal or administration, not only to meet notice requirements, but to improve the teacher’s effectiveness. As to the cumulative effect of the evidence, the use of isolated, previously unreported incidents could well cause terminations for many fine teachers in our state. I would vacate district court’s decision and reinstate the adjudicator’s determination.