ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTIONS AND PUBLIC SCHOOL ...

The cases from Table 52 note unfulfilled requirements on the part of the school system.
In Lomas v. Board of School Directors of Northwestern Lehigh School District (1982 Pa.
Commw.), Lomas argued unsuccessfully that she could not be reassigned without a demotion
hearing. This was true, but as the schools explained, nowhere in the legal code of Pennsylvania
did it require that the hearing be held prior to the reassignment. McFall also failed on his claim
of unfulfilled due process requirements because his demotion was initiated by the board and not
the superintendent, which triggered an abridgment to certain due process protections.
There were two cases where administrators prevailed at least in part. In Sanders v.
Delton-Kellogg Schools, 556 N.W.2d 467 (1996 Mich.), Sanders was able to prove that the board
had not provided her with a 60-day written notice of pending reassignment. Failure to do so
granted Sanders reinstatement in her administrative capacity. In Peterson v. Minidoka County
School District No. 331 (1997 U.S. App.), Peterson was able to show that his due process rights
were violated when he was reassigned because of his religious beliefs. Peterson was ultimately
rewarded over $300,000 in compensatory damages. There are requirements that must be met in
accordance with due process beyond the holding of meetings.
Table 53 displays three cases where the administrators involved claimed that they should
have been granted an evidentiary hearing but were not for one reason or another.
Table 53
Due Process--Denial of Evidentiary Hearings
Case Year State Action PP
Snipes v. McAndrew 1984 SC R S
Peterson v. Unified School Dist. 1989 KS NR S
Tazewell Co. School Bd. v. Brown 2004 VA S S
381