ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTIONS AND PUBLIC SCHOOL ...

employment elsewhere to no avail. In August, the Petersons filed a 10-count suit against the
district.
Issues: The issues brought forth in this case were multitudinous: (1) Was Peterson denied
due process? (2) Was Peterson’s right to the freedom of speech abrogated? (3) Was Peterson’s
right to freedom of religion violated? (4) Was Peterson’s right to educate his children as he saw
fid violated? (5) Was Peterson’s right to homeschool his children violated? (6) Did the school
district act in breach of contract? (7) Did the school district wrongfully terminate Peterson? (8)
Did the district violate the covenants of good faith and fair dealing? (9) Did the school district
intentionally inflict emotional distress upon Peterson? (10) Did the school district negligently
inflict emotional distress upon Peterson?
Holding: The District Court of Idaho granted summary judgment for the Petersons on 5
(1, 3, 4, 6, 8) of the 10 counts, and the district was granted summary judgment on 5 (2, 5, 7, 9,
10) of the counts. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the District
court’s ruling.
Reasoning: First, Peterson claimed that he was not granted appropriate due process. The
court cited Idaho Code § 33-515 as establishing parameters whereby administrative contracts do
not fall under permanent status or automatic renewals. Policy 504.1 by the district establishes the
due process procedures that focus on the non-renewal of an employee and the factors that can
mitigate such a non-renewal are carried out through the evaluative process with the
superintendent. Because Peterson’s evaluations were all favorable and his non-renewal was
centered on a personal and private decision, his due process rights were violated. Moreover, the
district had breached its contract and violated the covenants of good faith and fair dealing.
160