Lindgren v. Board of Trustees, High School District No. 1

No. 13323 I N THE SUPREME C U T O THE STATE O MONTANA OR F F 1976 WESLEY A. LINDGREN, P e t i t i o n e r and Appellant, BOARD O TRUSTEES, HIGH SCHOOL F DISTRICT NO. 1, FERGUS COUNTY, and DOLORES COLBURG, SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, Respondents and Respondents. Appeal from: . D i s t r i c t Court of t h e F i r s t J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Honorable P e t e r Meloy , Judge p r e s i d i n g Counsel of Record: For Appellant : McKittrick and Duffy, Great F a l l s , Montana D. P a t r i c k McKittrick argu&d, Great F a l l s , Montana For Respondents: Hon. Robert L. Woodahl, Attorney General, Helena, Montana Smith, Smith and Sewell, Helena, Montana Chadwick H. Smith argued, Helena, Montana Submitted: October 20, 1976 Decided: OEC 2 2 1976 Filed: DEC 2 2 1976 Mr. J u s t i c e Gene B . Daly d e l i v e r e d t h e O p i n i o n o f t h e C o u r t . T h i s i s a n a p p e a l from a judgment o f t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t , Lewis and C l a r k County. The judgment a f f i r m e d a d e c i s i o n o f t h e Supreintendent of P u b l i c I n s t r u c t i o n , upholding t h e d e c i - s i o n o f t h e County S u p e r i n t e n d e n t o f S c h o o l s , F e r g u s County, i n t h e m a t t e r o f t h e d i s m i s s a l o f Wesley A. L i n d g r e n by t h e Board o f T r u s t e e s o f S c h o o l D i s t r i c t No. 1, F e r g u s County. A p p e l l a n t was employed a s a n i n d u s t r i a l a r t s and math t e a c h e r a t F e r g u s County High S c h o o l . H e had had t e a c h i n g c o n t r a c t s w i t h F e r g u s County S c h o o l D i s t r i c t No. 1 f o r f o u r t e e n c o n s e c u t i v e y e a r s and was a t e n u r e t e a c h e r . On A p r i l 2 , 1973, t h e Board o f T r u s t e e s o f S c h o o l D i s t r i c t No. 1, h e r e i n a f t e r referred t o a s the Trustees, offered appellant a contract t o t e a c h f o r t h e 1973-74 s c h o o l y e a r ; h e s i g n e d and r e t u r n e d t h e c o n t r a c t on A p r i l 3 0 , 1973. On A p r i l 1 4 , 1973, a p p e l l a n t was a r r e s t e d and c h a r g e d with t h e v i o l a t i o n s of d r i v i n g while under t h e i n f l u e n c e of i n - t o x i c a t i n g l i q u o r ( t h i r d o f f e n s e ) and d r i v i n g w i t h o u t a v a l i d driver's license. H e plead g u i l t y t o t h e s e charges. Imposition o f s e n t e n c e was d e f e r r e d f o r o n e y e a r upon c o n d i t i o n t h a t a p p e l - l a n t c o m p l e t e t h e A l c o h o l R e h a b i l i t a t i o n and T r e a t m e n t Program a t t h e s t a t e h o s p i t a l a t Galen and t h e r e a f t e r r e g u l a r l y a t t e n d m e e t i n g s o f A l c o h o l i c s Anonymous f o r a p e r i o d o f o n e y e a r . These c o n d i t i o n s w e r e s a t i s f i e d and on March 7 , 1975 a p p e l l a n t w a s a l l o w e d t o w i t h d r a w h i s g u i l t y p l e a and t h e c h a r g e s w e r e d i s m i s s e d . On August 1 3 , 1973 t h e T r u s t e e s r e s o l v e d t h a t a l e t t e r o f d i s m i s s a l b e s e n t t o a p p e l l a n t b a s e d upon h i s b e i n g "con- v i c t e d " f o r d r i v i n g while under t h e i n f l u e n c e of i n t o x i c a t i n g l i q u o r and d r i v i n g w i t h o u t a v a l i d d r i v e r ' s l i c e n s e . A letter of d i s m i s s a l and n o t i f i c a t i o n o f h e a r i n g was d i s p a t c h e d t o a p p e l - l a n t by t h e c h a i r m a n o f t h e Board o f T r u s t e e s . The T r u s t e e s convened on August 27, 1973, and a p p e l l a n t a p p e a r e d and s u b m i t t e d t o t h e T r u s t e e s a p r o p o s a l a s k i n g them t o c o n s i d e r a w r i t t e n agreement which would a l l o w him t o con- t i n u e teaching. T h i s h e a r i n g was r e c e s s e d u n t i l August 29, 1973. When t h e p a r t i e s f a i l e d t o r e a c h a n agreement a t t h e second h e a r i n g , t h e T r u s t e e s moved t h a t a h e a r i n g be h e l d on September 4 , 1973. On August 31, 1973, t h e chairman o f t h e T r u s t e e s a d d r e s s e d a l e t t e r t o a p p e l l a n t amending t h e grounds f o r a p p e l l a n t ' s d i s m i s s a l , l i s t i n g a d d i t i o n a l b a s i s f o r d i s m i s s a l , and o f f e r - i n g a p p e l l a n t a d d i t i o n a l t i m e f o r p r e p a r a t i o n t o m e e t t h e new charges. The T r u s t e e s convened on September 4 , 1973, and upon motion a d o p t e d and r a t i f i e d t h e amended and c o n s o l i d a t e d n o t i c e for dismissal. A p p e l l a n t a p p e a r e d b e f o r e t h e T r u s t e e s on September 4 , 1973, and o b j e c t e d t o t h e amended l e t t e r o f d i s m i s s a l . H e de- manded t h a t h e a r i n g be based upon t h e i n i t i a l l e t t e r o f d i s m i s s a l d a t e d August 1 5 , 1973. A p p e l l a n t withdrew from t h e h e a r i n g when t h e T r u s t e e s i n d i c a t e d t h e h e a r i n g would be based upon t h e c h a r g e s c o n t a i n e d i n t h e amended l e t t e r o f d i s m i s s a l . Subsequent t o a p p e l l a n t ' s withdrawal, t h e T r u s t e e s resolved t h a t a p p e l l a n t was d i s m i s s e d , based upon c h a r g e s c o n t a i n e d i n t h e amended l e t t e r of d i s m i s s a l . A p p e l l a n t a p p e a l e d h i s d i s m i s s a l t o t h e County Super- i n t e n d e n t o f S c h o o l s and r e q u e s t e d a d e t e r m i n a t i o n l i m i t i n g t h e scope of t h e hearing. The County S u p e r i n t e n d e n t o f S c h o o l s ordered t h e scope of t h e hearing t o i n c l u d e t h o s e charges set f o r t h i n t h e amended l e t t e r o f d i s m i s s a l and s e t t h e h e a r i n g f o r September 2 1 , 1973. On September 1 8 , 1973, a p p e l l a n t p e t i t i o n e d t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t , F e r g u s County, f o r a w r i t of p r o h i b i t i o n , w r i t of mandate o r o t h e r a p p r o p r i a t e w r i t r e s t r a i n i n g t h e County S u p e r i n t e n d e n t of S c h o o l s from p r o c e e d i n g t o h e a r i n g on t h e c h a r g e s . The d i s t r i c t c o u r t i s s u e d , and s u b s e q u e n t l y d i s m i s s e d , an a l t e r n a - t i v e w r i t of mandate and p r o h i b i t i o n d i r e c t e d t o t h e County S u p e r i n t e n d e n t of S c h o o l s and t h e T r u s t e e s . A p p e l l a n t p e t i t i o n e d t h i s C o u r t f o r a w r i t of s u p e r - v i s o r y c o n t r o l on September 26, 1973, and asked t h a t t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t o r d e r d i s m i s s i n g t h e a l t e r n a t i v e w r i t be o v e r r u l e d . This C o u r t d i s m i s s e d t h e p e t i t i o n , Lindgren v . D i s t r i c t C o u r t , 162 Mont. 548, 514 P.2d 767. The County S u p e r i n t e n d e n t of S c h o o l s h e a r d a p p e l l a n t ' s a p p e a l on October 2, 1974, and a f f i r m e d t h e T r u s t e e s ' d e c i s i o n t o dismiss appellant. A p p e l l a n t a p p e a l e d t o t h e S t a t e S u p e r i n t e n d e n t of P u b l i c I n s t r u c t i o n who e n t e r e d a d e c i s i o n h o l d i n g t h e r e was s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e s u p p o r t i n g t h e f i n d i n g s of t h e County S u p e r i n t e n d e n t of S c h o o l s based upon t h e amended l e t t e r of d i s m i s s a l . The d i s t r i c t c o u r t o f Lewis and C l a r k County a f f i r m e d t h e d e c i s i o n of t h e S t a t e S u p e r i n t e n d e n t of Schools and from t h a t f i n a l judg- ment Lindgren a p p e a l s and p r e s e n t s two i s s u e s f o r r e v i e w : 1. Did t h e Board o f T r u s t e e s o f High School D i s t r i c t No. 1, F e r g u s County, d i s m i s s a p p e l l a n t i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e laws of t h e S t a t e of Montana? 2. Was t h e r e s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e on t h e r e c o r d t o s u p p o r t t h e f i n d i n g a p p e l l a n t was incompetent and u n f i t t o t e a c h under h i s 1973-74 s c h o o l c o n t r a c t ? T h e f i r s t a l l e g a t i o n of e r r o r c o n c e r n s t h e p r o c e d u r a l manner i n which a p p e l l a n t was d i s m i s s e d from h i s t e a c h i n g d u t i e s . S e c t i o n 75-6107, R.C.M. 1947, s e t s f o r t h t h e a p p l i c a b l e law i n Montana p e r t a i n i n g t o t h e d i s m i s s a l of a t e a c h e r under c o n t r a c t : "The t r u s t e e s o f any d i s t r i c t may d i s m i s s a t e a c h e r b e f o r e t h e e x p i r a t i o n of h i s employment c o n t r a c t f o r i m m o r a l i t y , u n f i t n e s s , incompetence, o r v i o l a t i o n of t h e adopted p o l i c i e s of such trustees. Any t e a c h e r who h a s been d i s m i s s e d may i n w r i t i n g w i t h i n t e n ( 1 0 ) d a y s a p p e a l s u c h dismissal t o t h e county superintendent; following s u c h a p p e a l a h e a r i n g s h a l l be h e l d w i t h i n t e n (10) days. I f t h e county superintendent, a f t e r a h e a r i n g , d e t e r m i n e s t h a t t h e d i s m i s s a l by t h e t r u s t e e s was made w i t h o u t good c a u s e , he s h a l l o r d e r t h e t r u s t e e s t o r e i n s t a t e s u c h t e a c h e r and t o compensate s u c h t e a c h e r a t h i s c o n t r a c t amount f o r t h e t i m e l o s t d u r i n g t h e pending of t h e a p p e a l . " S e c t i o n 75-5930, R.C.M. 1947, p r o v i d e s i n p e r t i n e n t p a r t : "No b u s i n e s s s h a l l be t r a n s a c t e d by t h e t r u s t e e s o f a d i s t r i c t u n l e s s it i s t r a n s a c t e d a t a r e g u l a r meeting o r a p r o p e r l y c a l l e d s p e c i a l meeting." See: Wyatt v. S c h o o l D i s t r i c t No. 1 0 4 , 148 Mont. 8 3 , 417 P.2d I t i s a p p e l l a n t ' s contention t h e T r u s t e e s ' a c t of d i s - m i s s a l is legally ineffective. H e r e a c h e s t h i s c o n c l u s i o n by c o n s t r u i n g t h e T r u s t e e s ' i n i t i a l l e t t e r o f d i s m i s s a l i n combin- a t i o n w i t h t h e amended and c o n s o l i d a t e d l e t t e r of d i s m i s s a l as a single notice t o dismiss. A p p e l l a n t a r g u e s t h a t s e c t i o n 75- 5930, R.C.M. 1947, r e q u i r e s t h a t t h e amended l e t t e r o f d i s m i s s a l "be t r a n s a c t e d a t a r e g u l a r meeting o r p r o p e r t y c a l l e d s p e c i a l meeting" of t h e Trustees. Appellant concludes t h e attempt t o d i s c h a r g e him i s v o i d s i n c e t h e amended l e t t e r o f d i s m i s s a l was m e r e l y a d o p t e d and r a t i f i e d by t h e T r u s t e e s r a t h e r t h a n b e i n g t r a n s a c t e d a t t h e meeting. W e f i n d t h i s argument w i t h o u t m e r i t . The i n i t i a l l e t t e r o f d i s m i s s a l n o t i f i e d a p p e l l a n t h e was d i s m i s s e d and t h a t h i s s e r v i c e s would n o t b e u s e d d u r i n g t h e 1973-74 s c h o o l y e a r . T h i s i n i t i a l l e t t e r based a p p e l l a n t ' s d i s - m i s s a l on t h e s e g r o u n d s : " * * * T h i s a c t i o n i s t a k e n b e c a u s e o f your c o n v i c t i o n on J u l y 1 6 , 1973 f o r d r i v i n g w h i l e under t h e i n f l u e n c e of i n t o x i c a t i n g l i q u o r , t h i r d c o n v i c t i o n , and d r i v i n g w i t h o u t a v a l i d driver's license. In addition these facts p l a c e you i n v i o l a t i o n o f s e c t i o n 75-6108, R.C.M. 1947, a s amended which r e q u i r e s t h a t 'any t e a c h e r under c o n t r a c t w i t h a d i s t r i c t s h a l l : conform t o and e n f o r c e t h e l a w s * * * . " I Our initial discussion concerns the basis upon which the trustees determined appellant should be dismissed. In the district court record we find the minutes of the August 13, 1973 Trustees' regular meeting. In these minutes appears this subtitle: "LETTER OF DISMISSAL TO BE SENT TEACHER: Trustee Swift moved seconded by Trustee Tresch that a letter of dismissal be forwarded to Wesley Lindgren, teacher in Fergus High School, because of a D.W.I. and driving without a valid license and conviction on both counts. The motion carried. " We conclude from this record that on August 13, 1973 at a regular meeting of the Trustees, it was resolved that appellant be dis- missed from his 1973-74 teaching duties on the basis of appel- lant's above mentioned violations. Next, we determine whether the basis for dismissal util- ized by the Trustees is legally sufficient for dismissal. Under section 75-6107, R.C.M. 1947, the dismissal of a teacher under contract requires a showing of immorality, unfitness, incompetence, or violation of the adopted policies of the Trustees. The initial letter of dismissal failed to substantiate any causal relationship between appellant's violations and his performance of teaching duties. This Court does not find, as a matter of law, that vio- lations for driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor and driving without a valid driver's license are tantamount to "immorality, unfitness, incompetence, or violation of the adopted policies of such trustees." Absent such showing, the discharge of appellant amounted to a breach of contract. Hovland v. School Dist. No. 52, 128 Mont. 507, 278 P.2d 211. Respondent Trustees contend appellant's dismissal should be upheld based upon the amended and consolidated letter of dis- missal which states: "Since charges were initially brought against Mr. Lindgren, additional information has come to the board. For this reason, amended and consolidated notice for dismissal is given. "The causes are: 'immorality, unfitness, in- competence, and failure to conform to and enforce the laws * * *.' (See sections 75-6107 and 75-6108, Revised Codes of Montana.) These causes grow out of Mr. Lindgren's arrest for DWI and driving without a valid Montana driver's license on April 14, 1973 and his conviction thereupon on July 16, 1973. In addition, the charges stem from Mr. Lindgren's performance as a teacher in his school, par- ticularly as to his poor relationship with students, his lack of willingness to make ade- quate plan preparation, his failure to accept responsibility in the school, his lack of interest in the students, his failure to maintain adequate class supervision and discipline, his poor example to students, his failure to convey skills possessed by him to his students as he should, his failure to take proper care of the classroom and the property placed in his charge, and his arrival at school in a disheveled appear- ance, smelling of alcoholic beverages." Respondents argue the clear and unequivocal ratification of the amended and consolidated letter of dismissal is proper. Furthermore, they contend appellant was not prejudiced by the amended notice of dismissal. Respondents cite the holding of the district court as authority for the proposition that "so long as there is notice and opportunity for hearing the Board can amend its charges for dismissal prior to hearing as was done here". We do not agree. The additional charges alleged in the amended and con- solidated letter of dismissal are derived from information which was available to the trustees at the time of the drafting of the initial letter of dismissal and at the time the Trustees accepted a new contract of employment for the 1973-74 year on April 30, 1973. This Court has already concluded the initial letter of dismissal did not establish legally adequate grounds for dismissal. To recognize the amended letter of dismissal as adequate in law would amount to submitting appellant to the burden of establishing the invalidity of charges propounded for the purpose of remedying legally inadequate charges. he Court concludes appellant incurred substantial legal prejudice when required to meet these additional charges. In view of our determination of appellant's first issue, further discussion regarding the sufficiency of the evidence is unnecessary. The judgment of the district court is reversed and the cause remanded for the determination of emoluments due appellant pursuant to statute and case authority4 -- Justice oncur : 9 kbn. Jack Green, sitting in place of Mr. Justice Wesley Castles.