Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Larry
|
|
Last Name
|
Allen, Jr.
|
|
Decision Date
|
1/16/2019
|
|
Docket Number
|
2019-0290-MAPS
|
|
ALJ
|
JSF
|
|
Respondent
|
Division of Corrections and Rehabilitation/Bureau of Prisons and Jails
|
|
Employment Type
|
STATE
|
|
Job Title
|
Correctional Officer
|
|
Topics
|
Termination; Dismissal
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Respondent had good cause to terminate Grievant.
|
|
Outcome
|
Denied
|
|
Statutes
|
W. Va. Code St. R. § 143-1-10.1.a. (2016)
|
|
Related Cases
|
Bonnell v. Dep't of Corr., Docket No. 89-CORR-163 (Mar. 8, 1990); Roberts v. Dep’t of Health and Human Res., Docket No. 2008-0958-DHHR (Mar. 13, 2009); Cosner v. Dep’t of Health and Human Res., Docket No. 08-HHR-008 (Dec. 30, 2008); Jones v. W. Va. Dep’t of Health & Human Res., Docket No. 96-HHR-371 (Oct. 30, 1996); Young v. Div. of Natural Res., Docket No. 2009-0540-DOC (Nov. 13, 2009); Livingston v. Dep’t of Health and Human Res., Docket No. 2008-0770-DHHR (Mar. 21, 2008); Frymier v. Higher Education Policy Comm’n, 655 S.E.2d 52, 221 W. Va. 306 (2007); Harris v. Dep’t of Transp., Docket No. 2008-1594-DOT (Dec. 15, 2008); McCoy v. W. Va. Dep’t of Transp., Docket No. 98-DOH-399 (June 18, 1999); Tickett v. Cabell County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 97-06-233 (Mar. 12, 1998); Huffstutler v. Cabell County Bd. of Educ., Docket No. 97-06-150 (Oct. 31, 1997)
|
|
Keywords
|
Dismissal; Termination; Probationary Employee; Code of Conduct; Misconduct; Use of Force; Unsatisfactory Performance; Discrimination; Arbitrary and Capricious; Mitigation
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
Grievant was employed by Respondent on a probationary basis as a Correctional Officer. Respondent terminated Grievant after finding that he “willingly used an excessive amount of force against an inmate by punching the inmate with a closed fist numerous times” and then “provided untruthful statements during the investigation” in telling the investigator that he did not strike/punch the inmate. Respondent proved that Grievant engaged in misconduct and that its dismissal of Grievant was not arbitrary and capricious. Grievant alleged that other officers had engaged in similar conduct without being disciplined and that the punishment he received was too harsh. Grievant did not prove that his termination was discriminatory or unreasonable and in need of mitigation. Accordingly, the grievance is denied.
|
Back to Results
Search Again