Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Allen
|
|
Last Name
|
Kaplan
|
|
Decision Date
|
3/23/2018
|
|
Docket Number
|
2009-1819-CONS(R)
|
|
ALJ
|
LRB
|
|
Respondent
|
Cabell County Board of Education
|
|
Employment Type
|
PROF
|
|
Job Title
|
Substitute teacher-professional personnel;
formerly Assistant Principal
|
|
Topics
|
Dismissed; Remand
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether there is relief to be granted- alteration in relief request.
|
|
Outcome
|
Dismissed; Moot
|
|
Statutes
|
W. Va. Code § 6C-1-1 et seq; W. Va. Code § 6-C-4(c)(2); W. Va. Code § 18A-4-14; W. Va. Code § 18A-4-3; W. Va. Code ST. R. § 156-1-6.21
|
|
Related Cases
|
Miller v. Ohio County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 15-88-013-3 (May 13, 1998); Redd v. McDowell County Bd. of Education, Docket No 2008-1773-McDED (Nov 9, 2012); Redd v. McDowell County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 2009-1477-McDED (May 26, 2011). Samuel Goodson, et al., v Fayette County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 2014-1654-CONS (November 12, 2015); Kaplan v Cabell County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 2009-1819-CONS (Jan 19, 2016)
|
|
Keywords
|
Remand; Motion to Dismiss; Duty Free Lunch; Work Schedule; Relief; Moot; Advisory Opinion
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
Grievant appealed remand decision to Kanawha County Circuit Court 5/2/18, CA !8-AA-209 (King); Affirmed 12/12/18
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
The Circuit Court of Kanawha County remanded and consolidated two related grievances filed by Grievant. The underlying grievances originally initiated in 2008/2009, protested Grievant’s work day, daily responsibilities and contended among other things that Grievant was not getting a duty-free lunch pursuant to W. Va. Code '18A-4-14. The relief sought included having certain identified responsibilities removed, have a defined workday, and receive a duty-free lunch. Subsequent to the filing of the grievances, Grievant retired from employment with Respondent, the Cabell County Board of Education. The selective injunctive relief of having certain identified responsibilities removed, receiving a duty-free lunch, and having an agency defined workday, as performed by Grievant prior to September 2008, have little to no application with regard to Grievant’s current duties as a substitute teacher-professional personnel. Grievant now wishes to contend entitlement to back wages. It is lawful to a allow timely request to amend a filed grievance. Nevertheless, the assigned ALJ, the trier of fact, does not find that Grievant is entitled to additional wages for duties performed.
|
Back to Results
Search Again