The issue in this case is whether a veteran teacher should be dismissed for having drawn and displayed a kitchen knife while quieting a noisy class.Petitioner, a veteran teacher, should not be dismissed for having drawn and displayed a kitchen knife while quieting a noisy class, where such conduct, though foolish, resulted from a momentary lapse of judgment and consituted a unique, isolated incident.
Whether Elizabeth Stuglik ("Respondent" or "Stuglik") committed the violations alleged in the Amended Administrative Complaint dated August 9, 2010, and, if so, whether such violations are just cause for any discipline against her license.Petitioner demonstrated Respondent violated Subsections 1012.795(1)(d) and 1012.795(1)(j), F. S. and FAC Rule 6B-1.006(5)(a) by having consensual sex with a co-worker and being dishonest, which is just cause for discipline of suspension and probation.
The issue in this case is whether there is just cause to terminate Amber Schmeider's employment with the Palm Beach County School Board.Just cause existed to terminate teacher who purposely engaged in sexual conduct on school grounds during school hours.
Whether Respondent committed the violations alleged in the Petition for Suspension Without Pay and Dismissal from Employment, as clarified at hearing, and, if so, what disciplinary action should be taken against her.Just cause did not exist to terminate annual contract of teacher who had engaged in sexual conduct on school grounds, but did so against her will, and had allowed another teacher to remove students from her class after the students had done their work.
Whether Rita M. Green (Respondent), committed the violations alleged, and, if so, what penalty should be imposed.Respondent unnecessarily used force to attempt feeding of an autistic student, leaving bruising. Such conduct is just cause for termination of employment.
Whether the Respondent committed the violations alleged in the Petition dated May 29, 2009, and, if so, the penalty that should be imposed.Petitioner should terminate teacher who committed second violation of drug-free workplace policy. Teacher conceded to misconduct in office. Testing positive for cocaine when teaching third graders met requirements for exception to progressive discipline
The issue in this case is whether Respondent's employment should be terminated by Petitioner.Petitioner did not meet its burden of proof. Respondent`s actions warrant sanctions, but not termination.
The issues in this case are: (1) Whether Petitioner's allegations regarding Respondent schoolteacher's purported performance deficiencies are, in fact, true, thereby justifying Petitioner's placing Respondent on statutory performance probation; (2) If the first question is answered in the affirmative, then, Whether Respondent satisfactorily corrected the specified performance deficiencies within the 90-day probation period prescribed by Section 1012.34(3)(d), Florida Statutes; and (3) Whether Respondent's employment should be continued or terminated.Petitioner School Board failed to carry its burden of proving that Respondent`s alleged performance deficiencies existed or persisted, and thus Respondent should be reinstated to the teaching position from which he was suspended without pay.
The issue in this case is whether Respondent’s employment should be suspended and terminated for the reasons set forth in the Amended Petition for Involuntary Resignation.Termination is appropriate where Respondent was willfully absent from duty without leave.
The issues in this case are whether the Respondent committed violations alleged in an Administrative Complaint and, if so, what disciplinary action should be taken.By contract applicable to this case, the School Board must prove grounds for dismissal by "clear and convincing evidence." The evidence in this case was not clear and convincing.
