TIFFANY M. COVERDELL v. KENTUCKY BOARD OF CLAIMS; KENTUCKY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
RENDERED: March 26, 2004; 2:00 p.m.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
MODIFIED: April 9, 2004; 2:00 p.m.
Commonwealth Of Kentucky
Court of Appeals
NO. 2003-CA-000819-MR
TIFFANY M. COVERDELL
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM FRANKLIN CIRCUIT COURT
HONORABLE WILLIAM L. GRAHAM, JUDGE
ACTION NO. 02-CI-00319
v.
KENTUCKY BOARD OF CLAIMS;
KENTUCKY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
APPELLEES
OPINION
AFFIRMING
** ** ** ** **
BEFORE:
JOHNSON, TAYLOR AND VANMETER, JUDGES.
TAYLOR, JUDGE:
Tiffany M. Coverdell brings this appeal from an
April 8, 2003, Order of the Franklin Circuit Court.
We affirm.
On August 4, 2000, Coverdell began employment with the
Jefferson County Public Schools.
On September 23, 2000,
Coverdell took the Praxis test to obtain a certificate of
eligibility for a teaching internship.
test.
She scored a 145 on the
She was informed that a score of 145 was not passing.
She again took the Praxis test on January 20, 2001.
was 145.
Her score
In a letter dated May 29, 2001, the Director of the
Division of Testing and Research at the Education Professional
Standards Board (EPSB) informed Coverdell that “[a] review of
the minimum score set in January 2000 revealed that the new
passing score of 146 is inconsistent with the score intervals
for test. . . your score of 145 is now a passing score.”
It
appears the Praxis test was scored in increments of five and,
therefore, an individual could score a 145 or a 150 but not a
146.
Consequently, Coverdell filed an action with the Board
of Claims alleging negligence against both the EPSB and the
Kentucky Department of Education (Department of Education).
The
Department of Education filed a motion to dismiss, and by Order
entered February 21, 2001, the Board of Claims dismissed the
Department as a party.
Coverdell then filed a Complaint in the
Franklin Circuit Court seeking judicial review of Board of
Claims’ Order dismissing the Department of Education.
The
circuit court ultimately agreed with the Board and affirmed its
decision.
This appeal follows.
Coverdell contends the Board of Claims committed error
by dismissing the Department of Education.
As an appellate
court, we step into the shoes of the circuit court and review
the administrative agency’s decision for arbitrariness. See
-2-
American Beauty Homes Corp. v. Louisville and Jefferson County
Planning and Zoning Commission, Ky., 379 S.W. 2d 450 (1964).
In
this instance, we must determine whether the Board of Claims’
decision to dismiss the Department of Education was arbitrary
and capricious.
Id.
After review of the record, we must agree
with the circuit court that the Board’s decision dismissing the
Department of Education was proper.
The EPSB was established in 1990 as part of the
Kentucky Education Reform Act and was housed within the
Department of Education.
By Executive Order 2000-851, effective
July 1, 2000, the EPSB was established as an independent agency
attached to the Governor’s Office.
It is uncontroverted that Coverdell was first employed
by Jefferson County Schools on August 4, 2000, and first took
the Praxis test on September 23, 2000.
These events took place
months after the EPSB became an independent agency unconnected
with the Department of Education.
Coverdell, however, argues
that the Department of Education “was responsible for the
implementation of the standards for the test when the standards
for Coverdell’s test were originally established.”
fact as inconsequential.
We view such
At the time Coverdell first took the
Praxis test, the EPSB was solely responsible for teacher
certification requirements and for the implementation of testing
standards.
Simply put, the EPBS had the singular authority to
-3-
establish the passing score when Coverdell took the Praxis test;
the Board of Education possessed no such authority at that time.
Upon the whole, we are of the opinion that the Board of Claims
properly dismissed the Department of Education as it owed no
duty to Coverdell.
Coverdell next asserts that the Board of Claims
February 21, 2001, Order failed to comply with the mandates of
Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 44.073.
Coverdell failed to
cite to a specific subsection of KRS 44.073.
Upon review of KRS
44.073, we presume that Coverdell is referring to subsection 3,
which states as follows:
The Board of Claims shall have primary and
exclusive jurisdiction to make findings of
fact, conclusions of law, and legal
determinations with regard to whether the
alleged negligent act was on the part of the
Commonwealth or any of its cabinets,
departments, bureaus, or agencies or any
officers, agents, or employees thereof.
Upon review of the Order, we are of the opinion that it
sufficiently complied with KRS 44.073(3).
Coverdell next argues that the circuit court committed
error by not granting her motion for summary judgment.
Based
upon our disposition of the above issues, we believe this
argument was rendered moot.
For the foregoing reasons, the Order of the Franklin
Circuit Court is affirmed.
-4-
ALL CONCUR.
BRIEFS FOR APPELLANT:
BRIEF FOR APPELLEE:
John Frith Stewart
Stephen C. Emery
Segal Stewart Cutler Lindsay
Janes & Berry, PLLC
Louisville, Kentucky
Kevin Noland
Frankfort, Kentucky
-5-
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.
