Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Brian
|
|
Last Name
|
Phillips
|
|
Decision Date
|
1/19/2018
|
|
Docket Number
|
2017-2333-CONS
|
|
ALJ
|
WBM
|
|
Respondent
|
Boone County Board of Education
|
|
Employment Type
|
PROF
|
|
Job Title
|
Teacher
|
|
Topics
|
Termination; Dismissal
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Respondent proved Grievant violated the Employee Code of Conduct and was insubordinate.
|
|
Outcome
|
Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
W. Va. Code § 18A-2-8
|
|
Related Cases
|
DeVito v. Bd. of Educ. of Marion County, 169 W.Va. 53, 285 S.E.2d 411 (1981); Fox v. Bd. of Educ. of Doddridge County, 160 W.Va. 668, 236 S.E.2d 243 (1977); Bd. of Educ. of the County of Gilmer v. Chaddock, 183 W. Va. 638, 398 S.E.2d 120 (1990); Williams v. Cabell County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 95-06-325 (Oct. 31, 1996); Reynolds v. Kanawha-Charleston Health Dep't, Docket No. 90-H-128 (Aug. 8, 1990); Jones v. W. Va. Dep't of Health & Human Res., Docket No. 96-HHR-371 (Oct. 30, 1996); Yerrid v. Div. of Highways, Docket No. 2009-1692-DOT (Mar. 26, 2010); Mason County Bd. of Educ. v. State Superintendent of Sch., 165 W. Va. 732, 739 (W. Va. 1980)
|
|
Keywords
|
Termination; Insubordination; Willful Neglect of Duty; Correctable Conduct; Mitigation
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
Greivant appealed to Kanawha County Circuit Court 3/1/18, CA #18-AA-182 (King); Affirmed, 7/26/18
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
FULL TEXT DECISION NOT CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
Grievant was dismissed from employment as a teacher for allegedly having several inappropriate conversations with students and making sexually charged comments. The allegations were based upon statements given by students in one of his classes. Grievant argues that the student allegations are not true and were brought as part of a plan by the students to get him fired. He opined that the students perpetrated this ruse because they thought his assignments and tests were unfair and the students were not getting the grades they wanted. Grievant also argues that he was entitled to be informed of any shortcomings through performance evaluations and given an opportunity to improve before disciplinary action was taken. Grievant also alleges that Respondent broke an agreement regarding prior actions and that the punishment was out of proportion to any misconduct he may have committed.
Respondent proved that Grievant, more likely than not, made the inappropriate comments alleged by the students, and his conduct was not correctable so as to require an improvement plan. Grievant did not show that the punishment was clearly excessive or constituted an abuse of discretion.
|
Back to Results
Search Again