Birmingham City Board of Education v. Carla Hawkins

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 12/18/2009 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o formal r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , Alabama A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may be made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL OCTOBER TERM, APPEALS 2009-2010 2080784 Birmingham C i t y Board o f Education v. C a r l a Hawkins Appeal from Montgomery C i r c u i t (CV-09-7) Court MOORE, J u d g e . In t h i s appeal, to renew t h i s court holds h i s or her teaching that a teacher certificate does who f a i l s not thereby a u t o m a t i c a l l y l o s e the p r o t e c t i o n s o f the Teacher Tenure A c t , Ala. Code 1975, § 16-24-1 e t s e q . 2080784 The A l a b a m a S t a t e D e p a r t m e n t o f E d u c a t i o n B, early childhood February teaching certificate 25, 1994. S u b s e q u e n t l y , Education ("the Board") entered issued a Class t o C a r l a H a w k i n s on the Birmingham C i t y Board of into a teaching employment c o n t r a c t w i t h H a w k i n s c o v e r i n g t h e 1994-95 s c h o o l y e a r , w h i c h the Board annually V i v i a n Davis, renewed the Executive the B o a r d n o t i f i e d thereafter. Hawkins by l e t t e r s t e p s Hawkins needed t o take obtaining which paying the application follow those t h a t Hawkins's teaching The l e t t e r s e t o u t t h e i n order t o renew h e r t e a c h i n g completing an continuing-education fee. instructions, 2002, year." included and v e r i f y i n g 1, D i r e c t o r o f Human R e s o u r c e s f o r c e r t i f i c a t e would expire " t h i s certificate, On A p r i l Apparently, because, on application, credits, Hawkins April and did 10, not 2006, S a m u e t t a H. Drew, a h u m a n - r e s o u r c e o f f i c e r f o r t h e B o a r d , s e n t Hawkins a certificate letter indicating that Hawkins's h a d e x p i r e d on June 3 0 , 2002, and t h a t teaching Hawkins s t i l l needed t o f o l l o w t h e s t e p s l i s t e d i n t h e f i r s t l e t t e r i n order t o r e i n s t a t e her c e r t i f i c a t e . McDaniels, I n November 2007, J e f f e r y t h e new E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r o f Human R e s o u r c e s f o r the B o a r d , sent Hawkins a t h i r d 2 l e t t e r i n w h i c h he s t a t e d : 2080784 "The A l a b a m a S t a t e D e p a r t m e n t o f E d u c a t i o n has i n f o r m e d you and B i r m i n g h a m C i t y S c h o o l s t h a t y o u r professional educator certificate has expired, although a v a l i d p r o f e s s i o n a l educator c e r t i f i c a t e is a condition f o r continued employment as a continuing service status ( i . e . tenured) teacher." The letter asked Hawkins t o meet w i t h t h e Human Resources D e p a r t m e n t on December 4, 2007, t o "measure where you a r e i n t h e [ r e n e w a l ] p r o c e s s one l a s t some t i m e renewal a f t e r September application time." Hawkins a s s e r t s 2007, she the Board with filed her along nothing certificate- with a p p l i c a t i o n f e e . A f t e r t h a t , Hawkins m a i n t a i n s , that, the "[s]he $20 heard f u r t h e r a n d b e l i e v e d t h a t a l l was b e i n g h a n d l e d by t h e Board." On April 18, 2008, the Board listed Hawkins on i t s n o n r e n e w a l l i s t , i n d i c a t i n g t h a t H a w k i n s ' s employment contract w o u l d n o t be r e n e w e d e f f e c t i v e May 3 0 , 2008. received that 23, 2008, H a w k i n s f i l e d an a p p e a l t o t h e C h i e f A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Law Judge of list the on or Office Administrative ("the appeal, ALJ"). about A p r i l of Law See Hawkins tenured teacher 24, 2008. Hawkins Administrative Judges, Office A l a . Code 1975, maintained that On Hearings, of § she May Division the Attorney 16-24-21(a). held of General In the s t a t u s that as a p u r s u a n t t o A l a . Code 1975, § 1 6 - 2 4 - 1 , w h i c h , 3 2080784 she a s s e r t e d , p r e v e n t e d t h e B o a r d f r o m c a n c e l i n g h e r t e a c h i n g employment c o n t r a c t w i t h o u t c a u s e and w i t h o u t f o l l o w i n g p r o c e d u r e s s e t o u t i n A l a . Code 1975, the §§ 16-24-9 and 16-24-10. H a w k i n s r e q u e s t e d an o r d e r d i r e c t i n g t h e B o a r d t o f o l l o w the teaching-contract the Teacher cancellation procedures set out in Tenure A c t . The B o a r d f i l e d an a n s w e r t o t h e a p p e a l on June 16, In t h a t answer, the B o a r d under the Teacher argued t h a t Hawkins had Tenure A c t because, no 2008. rights i t a s s e r t e d , once her t e a c h i n g c e r t i f i c a t e e x p i r e d and h a d n o t b e e n renewed, H a w k i n s no l o n g e r met 16-24-1. As the s t a t u t o r y d e f i n i t i o n such, the Board argued, of "teacher." i t could freely See cancel H a w k i n s ' s employment c o n t r a c t w i t h o u t f o l l o w i n g t h e n o t i c e h e a r i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s s e t o u t i n §§ 16-24-9 and 16-24-10. J u l y 2, 2008, t h e B o a r d amended i t s a n s w e r t o add a m o t i o n d i s m i s s t h e a p p e a l , a r g u i n g t h a t t h e A L J h a d no over the appeal because, current v a l i d and On to jurisdiction i t asserted, only a teacher with a teaching c e r t i f i c a t e has a right to appeal to In response, on t h e A L J u n d e r A l a . Code 1975, § 16-24-21(a). July an amended n o t i c e 22, § 2008, H a w k i n s f i l e d w h i c h she a l l e g e d t h a t , i f she was 4 of appeal i n n o t c o v e r e d by t h e Teacher 2080784 Tenure Act as certificate, she Dismissal Act The Board a r e s u l t of was ("the still expiration the of her teaching e n t i t l e d to r e l i e f under the F a i r FDA"), A l a . Code 1975, answered d i s p u t i n g the the amended § 36-26-100 e t appeal a p p l i c a b i l i t y of the on July 25, 2008, FDA. The A L J i n i t i a l l y s e t t h e a p p e a l f o r a h e a r i n g b u t , reviewing entered the p l e a d i n g s an order teacher may be out the canceled December 5, the employment Act. entitled to remanded t h e the the protections ALJ of the decided has contract of that set Hawkins had the e x p i r a t i o n of her that that ALJ gained to the p r o c e d u r e s Finding held facts 2008, t h e t h a t , once a t e a c h e r continuing-service status before certificate, of On a p p e a l c o u l d be only according Tenure teaching On t h a t the alone. status, Teacher gained and concluding continuing-service in after the b r i e f s of the p a r t i e s , c o n c l u d e d t h a t the were l a r g e l y u n d i s p u t e d b a s e d on seq. Hawkins Teacher remained Tenure A c t case to the B o a r d to a f f o r d Hawkins a and hearing. 1 J a n u a r y 5, 2009, t h e B o a r d f i l e d a p e t i t i o n f o r a w r i t certiorari to the Montgomery C i r c u i t Court, along with a Because the A L J found t h a t Hawkins remained e n t i t l e d to the p r o t e c t i o n s of the Teacher Tenure A c t , the A L J d i d not a d d r e s s t h e a r g u m e n t t h a t H a w k i n s was c o v e r e d by t h e FDA. 1 5 2080784 motion to responded stay to a the ALJ's on January order. 26, Hawkins 2009, arguing, t h a t t h e p e t i t i o n s h o u l d be d i s m i s s e d as b e i n g nonfinal denied. The brief. After arguments, of the p e t i t i o n alternatively, from execution judgment Board filed or the p e t i t i o n a written considering on A p r i l that response the p a r t i e s ' 29, 2009, should to briefs be Hawkins's and denied the c i r c u i t court oral the p e t i t i o n f o r a w r i t of c e r t i o r a r i , c o n c l u d i n g t h a t the A L J had correctly a p p l i e d the law t o the f a c t s . The B o a r d moved t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t t o s t a y i t s r u l i n g on May 29, 2009, a n d i t f i l e d an a p p e a l w i t h t h i s c o u r t t h a t same On a p p e a l , that following f o r a w r i t of c e r t i o r a r i . that the ALJ erred Hawkins 2 the Board argues t h a t the c i r c u i t c o u r t in denying the p e t i t i o n maintains date. remained 3 erred The B o a r d as a m a t t e r o f l a w i n h o l d i n g covered by the Teacher the e x p i r a t i o n of her teaching Tenure Act certificate. The On S e p t e m b e r 18, 2009, t h e B o a r d moved t h i s c o u r t f o r a stay, a s s e r t i n g t h a t i t s motion to stay f i l e d i n the c i r c u i t c o u r t h a d b e e n d e n i e d b y o p e r a t i o n o f l a w on A u g u s t 27, 2009. T h i s c o u r t d e n i e d t h a t m o t i o n on O c t o b e r 28, 2009. 2 We deny H a w k i n s ' s m o t i o n t o s t r i k e t h e r e p l y b r i e f o f t h e B o a r d , b u t we n o t e t h a t , i n r e a c h i n g o u r d e c i s i o n , we d i d n o t c o n s i d e r any i s s u e s n o t r a i s e d i n t h e B o a r d ' s p r i n c i p a l b r i e f . 3 6 2080784 Board also maintains t h a t , once her teaching certificate e x p i r e d , Hawkins a u t o m a t i c a l l y l o s t h e r s t a t u s as a " t e a c h e r " w i t h i n the meaning of the T e a c h e r Tenure A c t a n d , h e n c e , had no right to c o n t r a c t was notice and a hearing before her employment n o t r e n e w e d and f u r t h e r had no r i g h t t o a p p e a l to t h e A L J t o s e e k s u c h n o t i c e and a h e a r i n g . The Board f u r t h e r maintains by adopting that the circuit court i n c o r r e c t l e g a l c o n c l u s i o n s of the erred the ALJ. I n S o u t h A l a b a m a S k i l l s T r a i n i n g C o n s o r t i u m v. F o r d , So. FDA, 997 2d the 309 this circuit ( A l a . C i v . App. So. a case d e c i d e d court s t a t e d t h a t , i n appeals court on a petition c o u r t u s e s t h e same s t a n d a r d 997 2008), 2d a t 324. to consider for a writ of review under from a judgment of a of certiorari, as t h e c i r c u i t this court. That s t a n d a r d of review a l l o w s t h i s only "'"'questions touching the j u r i s d i c t i o n of the subordinate tribunal and the legality of i t s p r o c e e d i n g s . The a p p r o p r i a t e o f f i c e o f t h e w r i t i s t o c o r r e c t e r r o r s o f l a w a p p a r e n t on t h e f a c e o f t h e record. Conclusions o f f a c t c a n n o t be reviewed, u n l e s s s p e c i a l l y a u t h o r i z e d by s t a t u t e . The t r i a l i s n o t de novo b u t on t h e r e c o r d ; and t h e o n l y m a t t e r t o be d e t e r m i n e d i s t h e q u a s h i n g o r t h e a f f i r m a t i o n o f t h e p r o c e e d i n g s b r o u g h t up f o r r e v i e w . ' " ' " 7 court 2080784 F o r d , 997 So. Human Res., quoting Tel. 91 939 i n turn Co., in turn, 2d a t 324 203 So. City (quoting 2d 931, of A l a . 251, We 252, issued an Section n.4 (Ala. Civ. 82 So. thus r e v i e w the 519, record jurisdiction App. 2006), Southern B e l l 520 v. M i n d e r h o u t , 195 the ALJ p r o p e r l y e x e r c i s e d and 934 v. D a l e C o u n t y Dep't o f B i r m i n g h a m v. P o s t a l T e l . Co. (1916)). G.W. Tel. (1919), Ala. & quoting 420, 71 to determine So. whether over Hawkins's appeal order w i t h i n i t s authority. 16-24-21(a) p r o v i d e s , in pertinent part: "A t e a c h e r who has attained continuing service s t a t u s and has b e e n d e n i e d a h e a r i n g b e f o r e the l o c a l b o a r d o f e d u c a t i o n as r e q u i r e d by S e c t i o n 16¬ 24-6, 16-24-9, 16-24-15, o r 1 6 - 2 4 - 1 8 [ , A l a . Code 1975,] s h a l l have t h e r i g h t t o a p p e a l d i r e c t l y t o t h e C h i e f A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Law Judge o f t h e O f f i c e o f A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Hearings, D i v i s i o n of A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Law Judges, O f f i c e of the A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l f o r relief. ... [T]he judge shall do one of the following: (1) O r d e r a h e a r i n g b e f o r e t h e local board, (2) d e t e r m i n e t h a t t h e t e a c h e r has been t r a n s f e r r e d , suspended, or d i s m i s s e d i n v i o l a t i o n of t h e law and r e s c i n d t h e a c t i o n t a k e n by t h e l o c a l b o a r d , o r (3) s u s t a i n t h e a c t i o n t a k e n by t h e l o c a l board." By i t s plain t e a c h e r who "teacher" has language, § 16-24-21(a) attained continuing i s defined applies only service status." i n § 16-24-1 t o to "[a] The term include " a l l p e r s o n s r e g u l a r l y c e r t i f i e d by t h e teacher c e r t i f i c a t i n g a u t h o r i t y o f t h e S t a t e o f A l a b a m a who 8 2080784 may be e m p l o y e d as instructors, principals or supervisors i n the p u b l i c elementary and high s c h o o l s of the S t a t e of Alabama " In Ex p a r t e T u r n e r , court held teacher valid, that, 601 2d 995 order in So. to be ( A l a . 1992), the "regularly must have r e c e i v e d a c e r t i f i c a t e proper, and nondefective certified," to teach certification supreme through process. a a 601 So. 2d a t 996-97 ( c i t i n g A t h e n s C i t y B o a r d o f E d u c . v. R e e v e s , 388 So. 2d 515 provides, (Ala. 1980)). S e c t i o n 16-24-2, A l a . Code 1975, in pertinent part: "(a) Any t e a c h e r i n t h e p u b l i c s c h o o l s who s h a l l meet the following requirements shall attain c o n t i n u i n g s e r v i c e s t a t u s : Such t e a c h e r s h a l l have s e r v e d u n d e r c o n t r a c t as a t e a c h e r i n t h e same county or c i t y s c h o o l system f o r three consecutive s c h o o l y e a r s and s h a l l t h e r e a f t e r be r e e m p l o y e d i n such county or c i t y s c h o o l system f o r the s u c c e e d i n g school year." In this case, "regularly i t is certified" status before Pursuant undisputed and had that and t h e 2001-02 s c h o o l cause." been year. t o § 16-24-8, A l a . Code 1975, just had attained continuing-service a t t a i n e d c o n t i n u i n g - s e r v i c e s t a t u s may "good Hawkins Section a t e a c h e r who has be d i s c h a r g e d o n l y f o r 16-24-9 p r o v i d e s that the s u p e r i n t e n d e n t of the employing b o a r d o f e d u c a t i o n must n o t i f y the superintendent's teacher in writing of the 9 intention to 2080784 c a n c e l t h e t e a c h e r ' s employment f o r c a u s e . days later, the employing board of B e t w e e n 20 and education c o n s i d e r the s u p e r i n t e n d e n t ' s recommendation. request a public regarding decide the proposed whether teacher. or to private conference cancellation. cancel See § 1 6 - 2 4 - 9 ( a ) , the provide of the the board to may board shall contract A l a . Code 1975. i s canceled, written notice The meet The t e a c h e r with employment c o n t r a c t of the teacher shall 30 then of the I f t h e employment the s u p e r i n t e n d e n t cancellation to the must teacher w i t h i n 10 d a y s o f t h a t d e c i s i o n and i n f o r m t h e t e a c h e r o f the right the to contest superintendent receipt of contests decision by filing with a w r i t t e n n o t i c e o f c o n t e s t w i t h i n 15 days o f the the that notice. See cancellation, § the 16-24-9(b). teacher I f the is entitled novo h e a r i n g b e f o r e a h e a r i n g o f f i c e r s e l e c t e d by t h e and t h e e m p l o y i n g board, c o n t i n u e d w i t h or w i t h o u t Code 1975, to a § 16-24-10(a). disciplinary I t i s undisputed action. de teacher a f t e r which the h e a r i n g o f f i c e r among o t h e r t h i n g s , o r d e r t h a t t h e employment o f t h e be teacher can, teacher See Ala. t h a t Hawkins d i d not r e c e i v e w r i t t e n n o t i c e of the proposed c a n c e l l a t i o n of her t e a c h i n g c o n t r a c t ; t h a t Hawkins d i d not get the o p p o r t u n i t y t o 10 2080784 confer that with the the Board cancellation receive did of her regarding not c o n t e s t the the proposed cancellation; to meet teaching w r i t t e n n o t i c e of c o n t r a c t ; and The Board vote the on proposed c o n t r a c t ; t h a t Hawkins d i d the c a n c e l l a t i o n of t h a t H a w k i n s was her not teaching n e v e r g i v e n an o p p o r t u n i t y to cancellation. B o a r d a r g u e s t h a t i t had "good and j u s t " cause not to renew H a w k i n s ' s t e a c h i n g c o n t r a c t b e c a u s e , i t s a y s , H a w k i n s no longer held a v a l i d teaching c e r t i f i c a t e . to § 16-24-1, certified, which requires a Indeed, i n a d d i t i o n teacher § 16-23-1, A l a . Code 1975, to be regularly provides: "No p e r s o n s h a l l be e m p l o y e d i n t h e p u b l i c s c h o o l s o f t h e s t a t e as c o u n t y s u p e r i n t e n d e n t of e d u c a t i o n , c i t y s u p e r i n t e n d e n t of s c h o o l s , a s s i s t a n t superintendent, supervisor, p r i n c i p a l , teacher or attendance o f f i c e r u n l e s s such person s h a l l h o l d a c e r t i f i c a t e i s s u e d by t h e S t a t e S u p e r i n t e n d e n t of Education." H a w k i n s a c k n o w l e d g e s t h a t , b a s e d on § 1 6 - 2 3 - 1 , t h e f a i l u r e obtain a valid teaching certificate can c o n s t i t u t e good to and j u s t cause f o r the c a n c e l l a t i o n of a t e a c h i n g c o n t r a c t i n t h i s state. However, the parties effecting that cancellation. differ The 11 on the mechanism Board maintains for t h a t once a 2080784 teaching certificate "regularly expires, certified" "teacher" and with "continuing Teacher Tenure A c t . contract of nonrenewed the loses teacher his or her noncompliant without following Hawkins continuing-service certification of longer status as a the Hence, t h e B o a r d c o n t e n d s , t h e employment that hand, no s e r v i c e " w i t h i n the meaning of teacher the may notice, argues that once be summarily conference, c o n t e s t p r o c e d u r e s s e t o u t i n §§ 16-24-9 and other is 16-24-10. a teacher and On the attains s t a t u s , t h a t s t a t u s remains even a f t e r the the teacher l o s s of c e r t i f i c a t i o n may be lapses. Hawkins contends grounds f o r the that c a n c e l l a t i o n of t h e c o n t r a c t , b u t i t does n o t r e l i e v e t h e B o a r d f r o m f o l l o w i n g the p r o c e d u r e s s e t out give the teacher provide would the an 16-24-9 and opportunity hearing justify i n §§ officer less to e x p l a i n with severe 16-24-10 i n o r d e r the mitigating lapse and to to that action disciplinary evidence than cancellation. Both Hawkins Association, point decided the very teacher. In and amicus out issue that curiae, the before the Colorado court Education Supreme C o u r t in has favor of the F r e y v. Adams C o u n t y S c h o o l D i s t r i c t No. 14, 804 12 this Alabama 2080784 P.2d 851 ( C o l o . 1 9 9 1 ) , C a r o l F r e y was a t e n u r e d t e a c h e r whose t e a c h i n g c e r t i f i c a t e h a d e x p i r e d i n 1987. The l o c a l board of e d u c a t i o n n o t i f i e d F r e y i n w r i t i n g t h a t i t was t e r m i n a t i n g h e r employment due t o t h e l a p s e o f h e r t e a c h i n g c e r t i f i c a t e , t h e l o c a l b o a r d c h a r a c t e r i z e d as a f o r f e i t u r e o f h e r status. 804 P.2d request for Colorado Court a a t 851. hearing, The which of Appeals. local board prompted 804 P.2d tenured rejected an appeal a t 852. The which Frey's to the Colorado C o u r t o f A p p e a l s h e l d t h a t i t h a d no j u r i s d i c t i o n t o c o n s i d e r the appeal Frey was because, no Colorado's longer 27 certiorari, a teaching c e r t i f i c a t e "teacher" teacher-tenure appellate rights. 771 P.2d once h e r within hence, of no See F r e y v. Adams C o u n t y S c h . D i s t . No. 14, 1989). and, meaning had ( C o l o . C t . App. statutes the expired, On p e t i t i o n f o r a w r i t o f t h e C o l o r a d o Supreme C o u r t a f f i r m e d t h e decision of the Colorado Court of Appeals, but f o r d i f f e r e n t reasons. Under the statutory teacher-tenure scheme existing in C o l o r a d o a t t h e t i m e , t h e employment o f a " t e n u r e t e a c h e r " i n C o l o r a d o c o u l d be t e r m i n a t e d o n l y f o r "good and j u s t c a u s e " as established through specified notice 13 and hearing procedures 2080784 s i m i l a r t o those i n Alabama. See C o l o . Rev. S t a t . § 22-63-116 and i n Alabama, t h e term -117 ( 1 9 8 8 ) . Also, like "teacher" "mean[t] any p e r s o n who i s r e g u l a r l y c e r t i f i e d b y the teacher c e r t i f y i n g a u t h o r i t y f o r t h e s t a t e o f C o l o r a d o , a n d who i s e m p l o y e d t o i n s t r u c t , d i r e c t , or s u p e r v i s e the i n s t r u c t i o n a l program " Colo. Rev. Stat. § 22-63-102(9) (1988). Based on that d e f i n i t i o n , the employing board argued, and the Colorado Court of Appeals h e l d , teacher when t h a t Frey her c e r t i o r a r i review teaching had l o s t her s t a t u s certificate had as a tenured expired. On o f t h a t h o l d i n g , t h e C o l o r a d o Supreme C o u r t stated: "We b e l i e v e t h a t t h e s c h o o l b o a r d ' s p o s i t i o n i s b a s e d on t o o n a r r o w a r e a d i n g of the relevant p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e A c t [ t h e T e a c h e r Employment, D i s m i s s a l , a n d T e n u r e A c t o f 1967, C o l o . Rev. S t a t . §§ 22-63-101 t o -118 (1988)] a n d i s n o t c o n s i s t e n t with the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l protections accorded to tenure teachers. As F r e y p o i n t s o u t , i f t h e s t a t u t e i s t o be r e a d l i t e r a l l y , a b o a r d o f e d u c a t i o n c o u l d deprive a person of status as a t e a c h e r by t e r m i n a t i n g t h a t p e r s o n ' s employment, b e c a u s e t h e d e f i n i t i o n i n § 2 2 - 6 3 - 1 0 2 ( 9 ) d e s c r i b e s a t e a c h e r as one 'who i s employed t o i n s t r u c t , direct, or supervise the i n s t r u c t i o n a l program.' (Emphasis added.) Such a f u n d a m e n t a l l y u n f a i r r e s u l t c o u l d n o t have b e e n i n t e n d e d b y t h e l e g i s l a t u r e . See § 2-42 0 1 ( 1 ) ( c ) , 1B C.R.S. (1980) ( i t i s p r e s u m e d t h a t l e g i s l a t u r e i n t e n d e d j u s t and reasonable result). This serves to i l l u s t r a t e that an u n b e n d i n g l y l i t e r a l reading of the d e f i n i t i o n a l sections of the A c t does n o t s u p p l y t h e k e y t o l e g i s l a t i v e i n t e n t . We l o o k i n s t e a d t o t h e o v e r a l l l e g i s l a t i v e p l a n w i t h 14 2080784 r e s p e c t t o t e a c h e r c e r t i f i c a t i o n and t e r m i n a t i o n o f employment o f t e n u r e t e a c h e r s t o d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r a h e a r i n g i s r e q u i r e d i n order to terminate the employment o f a t e n u r e t e a c h e r whose teacher's c e r t i f i c a t e has e x p i r e d . See, e.g., Martinez v. C o n t i n e n t a l E n t e r p r i s e s , 730 P.2d 308, 315 (Colo. 1986) ( ' s t a t u t e i s t o be c o n s t r u e d as a w h o l e t o g i v e c o n s i s t e n t , h a r m o n i o u s and s e n s i b l e e f f e c t t o a l l i t s parts'). " " I n o r d e r t o a c q u i r e s t a t u s as a ' t e a c h e r ' u n d e r the d e f i n i t i o n i n § 22-63-102(9), i t i s n e c e s s a r y t h a t a p e r s o n become c e r t i f i e d . M i l a n v. Aims J u n i o r C o l l e g e D i s t . , 623 P.2d 65, 67 ( C o l o . App. 1980). The o n l y e x p l i c i t s t a t u t o r i l y i m p o s e d s a n c t i o n f o r loss of certification during a contract of employment i s l o s s o f t h e r i g h t t o c o m p e n s a t i o n . § 22-63-104, 9 C.R.S. ( 1 9 8 8 ) . N o t h i n g i n t h e s t a t u t e s suggests t h a t e x p i r a t i o n of a teacher's c e r t i f i c a t e h e l d by a p e r s o n e m p l o y e d as a t e n u r e teacher automatically results in loss of right to employment. "With l i m i t e d e x c e p t i o n s not a p p l i c a b l e here, a t e n u r e t e a c h e r has t h e r i g h t t o a h e a r i n g b e f o r e t h e s a n c t i o n o f d i s m i s s a l can be i m p o s e d . § 22-631 1 7 ( 1 ) , ( 3 ) . The A c t c o m p r e h e n s i v e l y e n u m e r a t e s t h e r e a s o n s f o r d i s m i s s a l o f a t e a c h e r who has a c q u i r e d t e n u r e . § 22-63-116, 9 C.R.S. ( 1 9 8 8 ) . T h i s i n d i c a t e s i n t e n t t o l i m i t t h e b a s e s f o r d i s m i s s a l . ... The A c t does n o t s p e c i f i c a l l y l i s t l o s s o f c e r t i f i c a t i o n as a ground f o r d i s m i s s a l of a tenure t e a c h e r . In view of the c e n t r a l importance of c e r t i f i c a t i o n t o the s t a t u t o r y scheme, h o w e v e r , we b e l i e v e t h a t t h e t e r m ' o t h e r good and j u s t c a u s e ' i n s e c t i o n 22-63-116 i s sufficiently encompassing to include issues surrounding the expiration of a teacher's c e r t i f i c a t e , thereby r e q u i r i n g t h a t the procedure p r e s c r i b e d i n s e c t i o n 22-63-117 be f o l l o w e d b e f o r e 15 2080784 a tenure teacher certification. c a n be dismissed f o r loss of "Our d e t e r m i n a t i o n t h a t t h e s t a t u t e s must be c o n s t r u e d t o r e q u i r e a h e a r i n g b e f o r e t h e employment o f a p e r s o n who h a s once a c q u i r e d s t a t u s as a t e n u r e t e a c h e r c a n be t e r m i n a t e d a l s o f i n d s s u p p o r t i n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l p r i n c i p l e s . A tenure t e a c h e r has a p r o p e r t y r i g h t i n c o n t i n u e d employment. H o w e l l v. W o o d l i n S c h o o l D i s t . R-104, 198 C o l o . 40, 45-46, 596 ( 1 9 7 9 ) ; a c c o r d S l o c h o w e r v. B o a r d ^uLuu. , oou U.S. 551, 76 S.Ct. 637, 100 L.Ed. u:?^ (1956) ; s e e a l s o de K o e v e n d v . B o a r d o f E d u c . o f West E n d S c h o o l , 688 P.2d 219, 227-28 ( C o l o . 1984) ( i r r e g u l a r p r o c e d u r e s v i o l a t e d t e n u r e t e a c h e r ' s 'due process r i g h t t o a f a i r and i m p a r t i a l d e t e r m i n a t i o n by t h e b o a r d . ' ) ; c f . B o a r d o f R e g e n t s v. R o t h , 408 U.S. 564, 576-78, 92 S . C t . 2 7 0 1 , 2708-10, 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972) (teacher without tenure and w i t h o u t c o n t r a c t u a l r i g h t t o r e n e w a l o f employment h a s no p r o t e c t i b l e i n t e r e s t i n r e e m p l o y m e n t ) . The s t a t e c a n n o t d e p r i v e a p e r s o n o f s u c h a r i g h t w i t h o u t due p r o c e s s . C l e v e l a n d Bd. o f E d u c . v . L o u d e r m i l l , 470 U.S. 532, 538, 105 S . C t . 1487, 1 4 9 1 , 84 L.Ed.2d 494 ( 1 9 8 5 ) ; H o w e l l , 198 C o l o . a t 45-46, 596 P.2d a t 60. " "Even where t e r m i n a t i o n i s f o r e x p i r a t i o n o f a teacher's certificate, factual inquiries are n e c e s s a r y t o d e t e r m i n e , among o t h e r t h i n g s , i f t h e c e r t i f i c a t e has, i n f a c t , e x p i r e d , and whether such e x p i r a t i o n c o n s t i t u t e s 'good a n d j u s t c a u s e . ' " 804 P.2d a t 853-56 The Colorado (footnotes omitted). Supreme Court held that Frey d i d not a u t o m a t i c a l l y l o s e h e r r i g h t t o c o n t i n u e d employment b a s e d on the e x p i r a t i o n o f h e r t e a c h i n g c e r t i f i c a t e . 16 804 P.2d a t 854. 2080784 Rather, she r e t a i n e d her r i g h t t o n o t i c e and a h e a r i n g to p r o v e t h a t h e r employment s h o u l d n o t be t e r m i n a t e d due t o t h a t lapse. The c o u r t f u r t h e r h e l d t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n t o t e r m i n a t e t h e employment court of of a tenured teacher appeals only following c o u l d be a p p e a l e d the B e c a u s e no h e a r i n g h a d b e e n c o n d u c t e d , guaranteed to the hearing. t h e supreme c o u r t h e l d t h a t the c o u r t of appeals had never o b t a i n e d j u r i s d i c t i o n the appeal. Given laws and over 804 P.2d a t 856-57. the s i m i l a r i t i e s those reasoning of persuasive, between Alabama's of Colorado the a n d we a f f i r m the c i r c u i t discussed Colorado i n Frey, Supreme are i n c l i n e d teacher-tenure Court we find particularly t o adopt t h a t reasoning c o u r t ' s judgment i n this case. County Board now-defunct of Education, State Tenure 372 So. to However, we a r e c o n s t r a i n e d t o f o l l o w t h e d e c i s i o n s o f o u r own c o u r t . See A l a . Code 1975, § 12-3-16. the supreme I n B a r g e r v. J e f f e r s o n 2d 307 Commission ( A l a . 1979), ruled that Barger, the a t e n u r e d t e a c h e r , h a d been i m p r o p e r l y d i s c h a r g e d i n v i o l a t i o n of the t h e n - e x i s t i n g teacher-tenure board d i d not immediately laws. When t h e r e i n s t a t e h i s employment employing following t h a t r u l i n g , B a r g e r b r o u g h t an a c t i o n i n c i r c u i t c o u r t s e e k i n g 17 2080784 an order compelling employment circuit and to court teaching the provide could Barger. argued t h a t the the school on The 372 So. 2d circuit bore at the 308. responsibility The however, that c o u l d not reasonably his continued Barger's therefore school board appeal, court Barger showed Alabama The that lapse of Court ruled, case, Barger of that have r e l i e d on t h e s c h o o l b o a r d t o certification. to the circumstances the the Supreme certificate. for his before court On circuit teaching under reinstate petition, i m p r o p e r t o compel the record before board to However, Barger's expired. h e l d t h a t i t w o u l d be board backpay. rule certificate reinstate employing court then his assure stated: " I n l i g h t o f t h e c l e a r s t a t u t o r y mandate t h a t c e r t i f i c a t i o n i s a c o n d i t i o n p r e c e d e n t t o employment as an i n s t r u c t o r , p r i n c i p a l o r s u p e r v i s o r , Code 1975, §§ 1 6 - 2 3 - 1 , 16-24-1, t h e t r i a l c o u r t d i d n o t e r r i n r e f u s i n g to r e i n s t a t e the a p p e l l a n t . " 372 So. 2d a t Barger hand, the 308. i s admittedly excerpt certification, instructor," the quoted above to follow. suggests On the that, one once " c o n d i t i o n p r e c e d e n t t o employment as lapses, summarily terminated difficult the employment without of n o t i c e and 18 the an teacher opportunity may to an be be 2080784 heard. A f t e r a l l , once i t d e t e r m i n e d that Barger's teaching c e r t i f i c a t e h a d e x p i r e d , t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t d i d n o t remand t h e case f o r a hearing before the employing board or the State T e n u r e C o m m i s s i o n as t o w h e t h e r t h e l a p s e p r e c l u d e d reinstatement. itself. discussion On Instead, the c i r c u i t court decided that issue the other in Barger's hand, Barger i t appears that the from circuit the f o l l o w i n g court actually considered the facts surrounding the lapse of the c e r t i f i c a t e . The Barger court stated: "[Barger] a s s e r t s t h a t he r e l i e d upon t h e J e f f e r s o n County Board of E d u c a t i o n t o apply f o r the r e n e w a l o f h i s t e a c h i n g c e r t i f i c a t e . Whether under some s e t o f c i r c u m s t a n c e s a t e a c h e r m i g h t r e a s o n a b l y r e l y upon a s c h o o l b o a r d t o renew t h e c e r t i f i c a t e s o f t h e t e a c h e r s i n i t s e m p l o y , we n e e d n o t d e c i d e . In t h e i n s t a n t c a s e , [Barger] h a d been d i s c h a r g e d , a l b e i t w r o n g f u l l y , by t h e Board o f E d u c a t i o n p r i o r to the time f o r a p p l i c a t i o n f o r renewal o f h i s c e r t i f i c a t e . Despite the f a c t that h i s reinstatement h a d b e e n o r d e r e d b y t h e S t a t e T e n u r e C o m m i s s i o n , he had n o t been reinstated a t the time of h i s certificate's expiration. "Although [Barger] presented evidence i n d i c a t i n g t h a t the J e f f e r s o n County Board o f E d u c a t i o n had unilaterally requested that h i s c e r t i f i c a t e be r e n e w e d i n 1973 when i t was due t o e x p i r e , he h a s n o t e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t t h e B o a r d , as a m a t t e r o f common p r a c t i c e , a u t o m a t i c a l l y r e q u e s t e d t h a t t h e S t a t e B o a r d o f E d u c a t i o n renew c e r t i f i c a t e s o f i t s t e a c h e r s , i n s t r u c t o r s , a n d o t h e r e d u c a t o r s . We a r e n o t p e r s u a d e d t h a t [ B a r g e r ] was e n t i t l e d t o r e l y on t h e B o a r d o f E d u c a t i o n t o renew h i s c e r t i f i c a t e i n 19 2080784 this instance, especially i n light of the d i f f i c u l t i e s which had d e v e l o p e d between [Barger] and t h e B o a r d w i t h r e s p e c t t o h i s employment. "Moreover, t h e r e c o r d r e f l e c t s t h a t t h e S t a t e B o a r d o f E d u c a t i o n has r a i s e d q u e s t i o n s r e l a t i v e t o additional requirements before [Barger's] certificate could be renewed. Under these circumstances, i t was [ B a r g e r ' s ] r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o assure h i s continued c e r t i f i c a t i o n . " 372 So. 2 d a t 308. T h a t d i s c u s s i o n i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t made some s o r t o f r e c o r d r e g a r d i n g expiration those of Barger's reasons been teaching sufficient, have been carefully certificate had of the case t h e outcome and t h a t , may different. After the reasons f o r the interpret service reviewing B a r g e r as h o l d i n g status that that automatically opinion, a teacher loses that with we do not continuing- status, and t h e a s s o c i a t e d r i g h t s g u a r a n t e e d b y t h e T e a c h e r T e n u r e A c t , once his or her teaching c e r t i f i c a t e expires. only that constitute the e x p i r a t i o n a good that teacher h a d no j u s t i f i a b l e Consistent record with a and j u s t cause contract of a tenured teacher of the Teacher can o n l y Rather, Barger teaching to cancel holds certificate may t h e employment when t h e r e c o r d shows t h a t t h e reason f o r allowing the lapse. T e n u r e A c t as i t e x i s t s be p r o d u c e d 20 at a hearing today, before the 2080784 employing board or a hearing officer i n compliance w i t h the p r o c e d u r e s mandated by §§ 16-24-9 and 16-24-10. does n o t c o n f l i c t with the reasoning we a d o p t i n t h i s Based teaching her on the foregoing, certificate complying attempted without hearing, to with to providing we and hold that the lapse with continuing service. of her §§ 16-24-9 nonrenew Hawkins the ALJ Hence, t h e c a n c e l e d h e r employment and 16-24-10. Hawkins's notice an When t h e contract opportunity for a appeal had or employment contract under § 16-24-21(a), t o Hawkins had a r i g h t , the ALJ, that d i d n o t a u t o m a t i c a l l y d i v e s t Hawkins o f B o a r d c o u l d n o t have l a w f u l l y Board or h o l d i n g i n Frey opinion. s t a t u s as a t e a c h e r without Hence, B a r g e r jurisdiction decide that appeal. The A L J o r d e r e d hearing, w h i c h i s one o f t h e a c t i o n s a u t h o r i z e d by § 16-24- 21(a). the Board to provide to Hawkins w i t h a Thus, t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t d i d n o t e r r i n a f f i r m i n g t h e jurisdiction and r u l i n g of the ALJ. AFFIRMED. Thompson, P . J . , and P i t t m a n and Thomas, J J . , c o n c u r . Bryan, J . , concurs i n the r e s u l t , 21 with writing. 2080784 BRYAN, J u d g e , c o n c u r r i n g I agree termination factual with i n the r e s u l t . t h e main opinion i s f o r e x p i r a t i o n of a inquiries are necessary that "'[e]ven teacher's to determine, where certificate, among other t h i n g s , i f the c e r t i f i c a t e has, i n f a c t , e x p i r e d , and whether s u c h e x p i r a t i o n c o n s t i t u t e s "good a n d j u s t c a u s e . " ' " 3d a t P.2d So. ( q u o t i n g F r e y v. Adams C o u n t y S c h . D i s t . No. 14, 804 851, 856 ( C o l o . 1 9 9 1 ) ) . teaching certificate may, I note t h a t the e x p i r a t i o n of a i n some c i r c u m s t a n c e s , good and j u s t cause f o r a d i s m i s s a l . 22 constitute

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.