Database Search Result Details
|
First Name
|
Roohi
|
|
Last Name
|
Khan, et al.
|
|
Decision Date
|
3/29/2019
|
|
Docket Number
|
2019-0327-CONS
|
|
ALJ
|
RLR
|
|
Respondent
|
Randolph County Board of Education
|
|
Employment Type
|
PROF
|
|
Job Title
|
Counselor
|
|
Topics
|
Remedy
|
|
Primary Issues
|
Whether Respondent demonstrated that the remedy requested by Grievants was contrary to law or contrary to proper and available remedies.
|
|
Outcome
|
Granted
|
|
Statutes
|
156 C.S.R. 1 § 3 (2018); W. Va. Code § 6C-2-3(b)
|
|
Related Cases
|
Hoff v. Bd. of Trustees, Docket No. 93-BOT-104 (June 30, 1994); Flowers v. W.Va. Bd. of Trustees, Docket No. 92-BOT-340 (Feb. 26, 1993); Lohr v. Div. of Corrections, Docket No. 99-CORR-157D (Nov. 15, 1999)
|
|
Keywords
|
Remedy; Default
|
|
Intermediate Court of Appeals
|
|
|
Circuit Court
|
|
|
Supreme Court
|
|
|
Synopsis
|
The record indicates that Respondent defaulted, and has acknowledged that it has no statutorily accepted excuses for its default. Since Grievants have prevailed on the merits by default, the sole issue is whether the remedy sought by Grievants is contrary to law or contrary to proper and available remedies. The Respondent has the burden of proving this affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence. The record established that the remedy requested by Grievants is available and not contrary to law. Contrary to Respondent’s assertion, Grievants do not request that the students at the alternative school be deprived of counseling services. Grievants simply request that they not be required to leave their place of assignment to provide those services without their consent and without notice and some opportunity to be heard on the assignment. Accordingly, the remedy is granted.
|
Back to Results
Search Again