Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

MURRAY CALLOWAY vs. GEORGE PITTMAN, 79-000808 (1979)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 79-000808 Visitors: 8
Judges: MICHAEL R. N. MCDONNELL
Agency: Department of Education
Latest Update: Nov. 07, 1979
Summary: Petitioner`s challenge to non-renewal of his contract must fail. He was not discharged, merely not renewed.
79-0808.PDF

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS


MURRAY CALLOWAY, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 79-808

)

GEORGE PITTMAN, )

)

Respondent. )

)


RECOMMENDED ORDER


Pursuant to notice, an administrative hearing was held before Michael R.N. McDonnell, Hearing Officer for the Division of Administrative Hearings, at 9:00 a.m., on September 11, 1979, in Room 104, Collins Building, Corner of Gaines and South Adams Streets, Tallahassee, Florida.


APPEARANCES


For Petitioner: Armando Garcia, Esquire

1801 North Meridian Road Tallahassee, Florida


For Respondent: Brian T. Hayes, Esquire

245 East Washington Street Monticello, Florida


Petitioner, Murray Calloway (hereafter Calloway), brings this proceeding pursuant to the authority of Chapter 6B-2.14, Rules of the Professional Practices Council, Florida Administrative Code, complaining of alleged violations of codes and standards adopted by the Council and approved by the State Board of Education by Respondent, George Pittman (hereafter Pittman)


FINDINGS OF FACT


  1. Calloway was an employee of the Jefferson County School Board during the 1977-78 school year serving as an English teacher at Howard Middle School. Calloway's employment arises by virtue of an annual contract of employment entered into between Calloway and Jefferson County. The term of the employment was a period of ten (10) months beginning August 15, 1977. The contract provides in pertinent part that no further contractual obligation extends beyond June 6, 1978, and that no legal cause is required of the School Board in the event the teacher is not re-employed.


  2. At the end of the contract period, it was determined that Calloway's contract not be renewed for the up coming school year. Calloway was advised by Pittman that based upon Calloway's experience, qualifications and certifications, the school would be better served by the placement of a better teacher in the position previously held by Calloway. Pittman assured Calloway

    that his judgment was based on several factors and was not a reflection on Calloway's character or integrity.


  3. During the school year, Calloway wrote a letter to the Monticello News which was published on Thursday, February 16, 1978. The letter criticized certain aspects of the school superintendent's and the school board's administration of the county educational system. There was no evidence upon which to make a finding that Pittman took any action with regard to Calloway because of the letter Calloway had written to the newspaper.


    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW


  4. Calloway alleges violations of Section 6B-4.08 and 4.09, Rules of the Professional Practices Council, Florida Administrative Code, stating that Pittman failed to follow certain procedures required by those rules in the event of dismissal from employment. The evidence fails to sustain these charges because Calloway was not dismissed. Rather, his contract was merely not renewed.


  5. Calloway further charges Pittman with violating Section 6B-1.04(2)(b),

    (f) and (h), Rules of the Professional Practices Council, Florida Administrative Code, because Pittman did not follow certain procedures required by that Rule in the event of significant changes in employment. It is concluded as a matter of law, that the non-renewal of a contract is not a "significant change in employment" as contemplated by the Rule. Accordingly, those charges must fail.


  6. Finally, Calloway charges Pittman with a violation of Rule 6B- 1.03(2)(c), Rules of the Professional Practices Council, Florida Administrative Code, charging that Pittman interfered with Calloway's right to express his views publicly and violation of Rule 6B-1.05(1)(3), Rules of the Professional Practices Council, Florida Administrative Code, charging that Pittman attempted to thwart the expression of differing opinions. As to these final charges, there is no evidence to support a finding that Pittman took any action whatsoever to interfere with the expression of views or thwart the expression of differing opinions. It is, therefore,


RECOMMENDED that no further action be taken on the complaint.


DONE and ENTERED this 7th day of November, 1979, in Tallahassee, Florida.


MICHAEL R. N. MCDONNELL

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings Room 101, Collins Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301

(904) 488-9675


COPIES FURNISHED:


Brian T. Hayes, Esquire

245 East Washington Street Monticello, Florida 32344

Armando Garcia, Esquire 1801 North Meridian Road Tallahassee, Florida


Dr. Juhan Mixon

319 West Madison Street, Suite 1 Tallahassee, Florida 32301


Docket for Case No: 79-000808
Issue Date Proceedings
Nov. 07, 1979 Recommended Order sent out. CASE CLOSED.

Orders for Case No: 79-000808
Issue Date Document Summary
Nov. 07, 1979 Recommended Order Petitioner`s challenge to non-renewal of his contract must fail. He was not discharged, merely not renewed.
Source:  Florida - Division of Administrative Hearings

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer