BRD OF TRUSTEES v SUPT OF PUBLIC

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

No. 13131 I N THE SUPREME COURT O THE STATE O MONTANA F F BOARD O TRUSTEES O SCHOOL F F DISTRICT NO. 9 , GLACIER COUNTY, MONTANA, P e t i t i o n e r , a n d Respondent, THE SUPERINTENDENT O PUBLIC F F INSTRUCTION O THE STATE O F MONTANA AND GRANT R. GALLUP, Respondent and A p p e l l a n t . Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e F i r s t J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Honorable Gordon R, Bennett, Judge p r e s i d i n g . Counsel of Record: For A p p e l l a n t : M. F. Hennessey argued, B u t t e , Montana For Respondent: Richard G i l l e s p i e argued and Ross Cannon argued, Helena, Montana Submitted: Decided : Filed: D~~ Z~ 19f6 October 22, 1976 PEG 2 1 1976 Chief J u s t i c e James T . H a r r i s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e Court Mr. . T h i s a p p e a l i s from a judgment of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t , Lewis and C l a r k County, w h e r e i n t h e r e i n s t a t e m e n t o f a p p e l l a n t Grant R. G a l l u p , a s a t e a c h e r f o r t h e r e m a i n d e r of h i s 1973-74 c o n t r a c t , by t h e S t a t e S u p e r i n t e n d e n t of P u b l i c I n s t r u c t i o n w a s reversed. I n t h e s p r i n g of 1973, a p p e l l a n t had been employed a s a t e a c h e r by r e s p o n d e n t Board of T r u s t e e s , f o r n i n e c o n s e c u t i v e years. A t t h i s t i m e he w a s o f f e r e d and he a c c e p t e d a t e a c h i n g c o n t r a c t f o r t h e 1973-74 s c h o o l y e a r . On August 30 and 31, 1973 t h e s c h o o l d i s t r i c t conducted a pre-school o r i e n t a t i o n f o r new and r e t u r n i n g t e a c h e r s . Appel- l a n t a t t e n d e d t h e morning s e s s i o n on August 30, 1973 and b o t h s e s s i o n s August 31, 1973. s e s s i o n August 30, 1973. H e f a i l e d t o attend t h e afternoon On August 31, 1973, a p p e l l a n t was asked t o e x p l a i n h i s a b s e n c e t h e p r e v i o u s d a y , he r e s p o n d e d , and was t h e n suspended. H e later received t h i s l e t t e r : "You a r e hereby n o t i f i e d of your s u s p e n s i o n a s a n employee o f School D i s t r i c t N o . 9, e f f e c t i v e Aug;st 31, 1973, f o r f a i l u r e t o a t t e n d opening day s c h o o l e x e r c i s e s on Auqust 30, 1973, i n v i o l a t i o n o f t e r m s o f your t e a c h i n g c o n t r a c t . "The Board o f T r u s t e e s w i l l meet a t 1:30 P.M. on Tuesday, September 4 , 1973, i n t h e s c h o o l administration building, t o consider further a c t i o n on t h i s m a t t e r . "You a r e hereby r e q u e s t e d t o a t t e n d t h e m e e t i n g and s t a t e your r e a s o n s f o r n o t a t t e n d i n g o p e n i n g day a c t i v i t i e s . " (Emphasis a d d e d . ) A p p e l l a n t a t t e n d e d t h e meeting and s t a t e d he w a s ill on t h e a f t e r n o o n of August 30, 1973. I t was d i s c o v e r e d t h e a p p e l - l a n t worked e l s e w h e r e t h a t p a r t i c u l a r a f t e r n o o n . In addition t o t h e a b s e n c e s p e c i f i e d i n t h e l e t t e r , t h e Board a l s o i n q u i r e d i n t o and c o n s i d e r e d t h e a b s e n c e s of a p p e l l a n t t h r o u g h o u t t h e e n t i r e n i n e y e a r s of employment. T h e r e a f t e r , t h e Board v o t e d t o dismiss appellant. A p p e l l a n t a p p e a l e d t o t h e County S u p e r i n t e n d e n t of S c h o o l s , and was r e i n s t a t e d , f o r t h e r e a s o n t h a t a o n e - h a l f day of a b s e n c e was n o t c o n s i d e r e d a n emergency o r s i c k l e a v e and d i d n o t j u s t i f y d i s m i s s a l , b u t a d e d u c t i o n o f pay. The Board t h e n a p p e a l e d t o t h e S t a t e S u p e r i n t e n d e n t o f P u b l i c I n s t r u c t i o n , whereupon t h e County S u p e r i n t e n d e n t ' s dec i s i o n was a f f i r m e d . The S t a t e S u p e r i n t e n d e n t found t h e o n e - h a l f d a y a b s e n c e was d e m i n i m i s , and t h e a b s e n c e s p r i o r t o a p p e l l a n t ' s 1973-74 c o n t r a c t c o u l d n o t b e c o n s i d e r e d by t h e Board, and a s s u c h c o u l d n o t be p a r t o f t h e b a s i s f o r d i s m i s s a l . The Board t h e n a p p e a l e d t o t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t . The d i s - t r i c t c o u r t reversed t h e S t a t e S u p e r i n t e n d e n t ' s d e c i s i o n , concluding that: ( a ) The Board was e n t i t l e d t o c o n s i d e r a p p e l l a n t ' s a b s e n c e s o c c u r r i n g p r i o r t o h i s 1973-74 c o n t r a c t . ( b ) When combined w i t h c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f s u c h a b s e n c e s , t h e unexcused o n e - h a l f d a y a b s e n c e was l e g a l l y s u f f i c i e n t t o j u s t i f y dismissal. ( c ) The S u p e r i n t e n d e n t of P u b l i c I n s t r u c t i o n exceeded h e r a u t h o r i t y i n making h e r d e c i s i o n by i n c o r r e c t a p p l i c a t i o n o f law a s t o what t h e Board c o u l d c o n s i d e r i n d e t e r m i n i n g a c t i o n t o b e day t a k e n on t h e o n e - h a l f / u n e x c u s e d a b s e n c e . Appellant a l l e g e s t h e s e conclusions of t h e d i s t r i c t court are i n error. B e f o r e d i s c u s s i n g t h i s i s s u e , t h e i n s t a n t c a s e must b e d i s t i n g u i s h e d from a s e p a r a t e a c t i o n between t h e s e same p a r t i e s . I n t h e o t h e r a c t i o n , G a l l u p was t e r m i n a t e d a s a t e n u r e t e a c h e r when t h e Board e l e c t e d n o t t o o f f e r him a c o n t r a c t f o r t h e 197475 s c h o o l y e a r . s e c t i o n s 75-6103, That t e r m i n a t i o n , pursuant t o t h e t e n u r e s t a t u t e s , 75-6104, R.C.M. 1 9 4 7 , was a f f i r m e d by t h e S t a t e Superintendent of P u b l i c I n s t r u c t i o n and, a s f a r as t h e r e c o r d p r e s e n t e d d i s c l o s e s , h a s n o t been a p p e a l e d by G a l l u p . Therefore, t h e i n s t a n t proceeding involves only t h e d i s m i s s a l of a p p e l l a n t f o r t h e r e m a i n d e r of h i s 1973-74 c o n t r a c t , p u r s u a n t t o s e c t i o n 75-6107, R.C.M. 1947, which s t a t e s : "The t r u s t e e s o f any d i s t r i c t may d i s m i s s a t e a c h e r b e f o r e t h e e x p i r a t i o n o f h i s employment c o n t r a c t f o r i m m o r a l i t y , u n f i t n e s s , incompetence, o r v i o l a t i o n of t h e adopted p o l i c i e s of such trustees. Any t e a c h e r who h a s been d i s m i s s e d may i n w r i t i n g w i t h i n t e n ( 1 0 ) d a y s a p p e a l s u c h d i s m i s s a l t o t h e county superintendent; following such appeal a hearing s h a l l be held w i t h i n t e n ( 1 0 ) days. I f t h e county superintendent, a f t e r a hearing, determines t h a t t h e dismissal by t h e t r u s t e e s was made w i t h o u t good c a u s e , he s h a l l o r d e r t h e t r u s t e e s t o r e i n s t a t e such t e a c h e r and t o compensate s u c h t e a c h e r a t h i s c o n t r a c t amount f o r t h e t i m e l o s t d u r i n g t h e pending o f t h e a p p e a l . " (Emphasis a d d e d . ) I t i s apparent t h a t d i s m i s s a l of a t e a c h e r under s e c t i o n 75-6107, R.C.M. 1947, must be f o r o n e o f t h e f o u r s p e c i f i e d c a u s e s , which i s f u r t h e r q u a l i f i e d by t h e c o u n t y s u p e r i n t e n d e n t ' s s c o p e o f r e v i e w t o amount t o good c a u s e . A l t h o u g h no method o f proced- u r e i s set f o r t h i n t h e s t a t u t e f o r t h e guidance of t h e school board, it i s a w e l l d e f i n e d p r i n c i p l e , i n s u c h c i r c u m s t a n c e s where d i s m i s s a l must b e f o r good c a u s e and r e g u l a t e d by s t a t u t e , t h a t o n e i s e n t i t l e d , i n common j u s t i c e , t o a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o m e e t t h e charges before being dismissed. 1, 20 Mont. 1 3 8 P.2d K e l l i s o n v . S c h o o l D i s t . No. 1 5 3 , 1 5 5 , 50 P . 421; Howard v . I r e l a n d , 114 Mont. 488, 569; Opheim v . S t a t e F i s h and Game Cornrn., 3 2 3 P.2d 1116; Wyatt v. School D i s t . 133 Mont. 362, No. 1 0 4 , 148 Mont. 8 3 , 417 P.2d 221; 68 Am J u r 2d, S c h o o l s , 5 185. The o p p o r t u n i t y t o m e e t t h e c h a r g e s b e f o r e b e i n g d i s m i s s e d under them n e c e s s a r i l y i n c l u d e s n o t i c e o f t h e c h a r g e s a g a i n s t him, f o r w i t h o u t s u c h n o t i c e t h i s o p p o r t u n i t y would be m e a n i n g l e s s . The n o t i c e need n o t m e e t t h e f o r m a l r e q u i r e m e n t s o f a c r i m i n a l i n d i c t m e n t , however i t must be s u f f i c i e n t l y d e t a i l e d t o i n f o r m t h e t e a c h e r o f t h e c h a r g e s a g a i n s t him, s o h e i s r e a s o n a b l y a b l e t o formulate a defense. For t h e s e r e a s o n s we a d o p t t h e d o c t r i n e s e t f o r t h i n 68 S c h o o l s , 5 1 9 4 , which s t a t e s : Am J u r 2d, "While s c h o o l b o a r d s a r e n o t bound t o s t r i c t c o n f o r m i t y w i t h c o u r t r u l e s and p r a c t i c e s , t h e y must, n e v e r t h e l e s s , o b s e r v e t h e e l e m e n t a r y and fundamental p r i n c i p l e s of j u d i c i a l i n q u i r y . And a l t h o u g h a d e g r e e o f i n f o r m a l i t y may a t t e n d t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p r o c e e d i n g s , it must a p p e a r t h a t t h e d i s m i s s a l i s based upon e v i d e n c e s u p p o r t i n g t h e s p e c i f i c charge o r charges a g a i n s t t h e teacher and upon no o t h e r e v i d e n c e . * * * " (Emphasis . added. ) - - - A s concluded by t h e S t a t e S u p e r i n t e n d e n t of P u b l i c I n - s t r u c t i o n and t h e County S u p e r i n t e n d e n t , t h i s c e r t a i n l y was n o t t h e c a s e with t h e Board's d i s m i s s a l of a p p e l l a n t . The l e t t e r of n o t i c e s e n t by t h e Board mast c l e a r l y r e f e r s t o t h e o n e - h a l f d a y unexcused a b s e n c e a s t h e s o l e r e a s o n f o r h i s d i s m i s s a l , and i n f o r m s him t o a p p e a r and respond t o t h a t s p e c i f i c a b s e n c e . How- e v e r , when a p p e l l a n t p r e s e n t e d h i m s e l f a t t h e h e a r i n g , he was a l s o q u e s t i o n e d and i n v e s t i g a t e d a s t o i n s t a n c e s o c c u r r i n g througho u t t h e e n t i r e n i n e y e a r s of h i s employment. A p p e l l a n t was n o t g i v e n p r o p e r n o t i c e of t h e s e a d d i t i o n a l c h a r g e s . Therefore, t h e Board c o u l d n o t c o n s i d e r them nor make them a b a s i s o r a p o r t i o n of t h e b a s i s f o r a p p e l l a n t ' s d i s m i s s a l . The c o n c l u s i o n s of law of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t , p r e v i o u s l y set f o r t h , a r e i n e r r o r . Therefore, w e reverse t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ' s judgment and a f f i r m t h a t o f t h e S t a t e S u p e r i n t e n d e n t o f Public I n s t r u c t i o n - f o r t h e r e m a i n d e r of h i s 1973-74 t e a c h i n g D ' L,,J--------&--------------------.- .. *+- Chief J u s t i c e f I 6-a Hon. L. C.,,Gulbrandson, D i s t r i c t J u d g e , s i r t i n g i n p l a c e of M r . Justice esley Castles. 7

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.