ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTIONS AND PUBLIC SCHOOL ...

Case Year State Action PP Litigative Claim
Peterson v. Unified
School Dist.
1989 KS NR S Peterson argued that he was denied due process
and that he had been unjustly stigmatized by the
district’s actions during his non-renewal for a
voluminous amount of interpersonal strife as
evidenced by the complaints levied by parents,
teachers and community members against
Peterson.
Pierce v. Engle 1989 KS NR S The Pierces were a husband-wife combination
that worked for the school district; both argued
that their non-renewals during a reduction in
force violated their due process safeguards and
was based on discrimination against Mr. Pierce
as recovering alcoholic.
Rogers v. Kelly 1989 AR T SPLIT Rogers alleged that his termination was
motivated by racial discrimination and violated
his due process protections. His termination
followed a three year period where he was
McFall v. Madera
Unified School Dist.
373
reassigned twice for interpersonal strife.
1990 CA D S McFall contended that his demotion to a
teaching position violated state due process
safeguards included in his contract because the
demotion and termination of his administrative
contract were not recommended by the
superintendent of schools.
Terry v. Woods 1992 WI R S Terry claimed that his suspensions and
reassignment for failed leadership measures and
interpersonal strife violated due process by
Perry v. Houston
Ind. School Dist.
Brown v. Bd. of
Educ.
Sanders v. Delton-
Kellogg Schools
McCormack v.
Maplewood-
Richmond Heights
School Dist. Bd. of
Educ.
abridging his property and liberty interests.
1995 TX R S Perry claimed that his reassignment to a district
level position for his failure to report the sexual
assault of a student was improper because he
was not provided with a job description for his
new assignment denying him due process and
abridging his property and liberty interests.
1996 KS NR S Brown claimed that her non-renewal for failed
leadership and interpersonal strife was invalid
because she was denied due process when her
hearing was conducted inappropriately.
1996 MI R E Sanders contended that her reassignment was a
non-renewal of her administrative contract and
that she had not been provided with the complete
due process bases on her tenured status and the
grounds of her contract.
1996 MO T S McCormack claimed that her termination for
failure to remediate numerous problems with her
leadership style was wrongful and violated her
due process rights infringing on her liberty
interests.
(table continues)