ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTIONS AND PUBLIC SCHOOL ...

corporal punishment rules and incorrectly claimed that he possessed tenure, but he had not
completed 2 years successfully; he was working in his second year.
Housley v. North Panola Consolidated School District (1987 U.S. Dist.) presented an odd
case as he (Housley) claimed, even though he admitted not having tenure, he still possessed a
property interest in keeping his position. Only tenure privileges confer property interests. Finally,
in Downing v. City of Lowell (2000 Mass. App.), Downing’s tenure had been revoked due to a
change in law, and he unknowingly claimed tenure protection following the non-renewal of his
administrative contract. Understanding if one possesses tenure in any capacity is important, but
understanding the extent for that capacity is vital.
Table 61 displays seven cases where administrator’s incorrectly claimed tenure
protections that were extended to teachers, not administrators.
Table 61
Tenure Violations--Incorrect Tenure Protection Claims
Case Year State Action PP
Pullum v. Smallridge 1983 TN R S
Snipes v. McAndrew 1984 SC R S
Joseph v. Lake Ridge School Corp. 1991 IN NR S
Barr v. Bd. of Trustees 1995 SC T S
State ex rel. Quiring v. Bd. of Educ. 2001 MN R S
Jones v. Miami-Dade Co. 2002 FL NR S
Hinckley v. School Bd. of Ind. School Dist. 2004 MN T S
Each case identified in Table 61 involved an administrator making an incorrect tenure
protection claim. In Pullum v. Smallridge (1983 Tenn.) and Barr v. Board of Trustees, (1995 S.C.
App.), both administrators claimed that their tenure protections were violated due to their
terminations. Neither was terminated at the inception of the employment action; they were
393