Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change
Find Similar Cases by Filters
You can browse Case Laws by Courts, or by your need.
Find 49 similar cases
COLLIER COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD vs JOSEPH J. GAGLIANO, 00-004693PL (2000)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Naples, Florida Nov. 16, 2000 Number: 00-004693PL Latest Update: Dec. 23, 2024
# 1
PAM STEWART, AS COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION vs DENISE COOPER, 16-002491PL (2016)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:West Palm Beach, Florida May 05, 2016 Number: 16-002491PL Latest Update: Dec. 23, 2024
# 2
PAM STEWART, AS COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION vs ALDINE CHAPMAN, 16-004350PL (2016)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:West Palm Beach, Florida Jul. 29, 2016 Number: 16-004350PL Latest Update: Dec. 23, 2024
# 3
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD vs NEIL D. LEFKOWITZ, 03-000186 (2003)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Miami, Florida Jan. 21, 2003 Number: 03-000186 Latest Update: Nov. 21, 2005

The Issue Whether the Respondent committed the violations alleged in the letter from the Petitioner dated January 16, 2003, and in the Notice of Specific Charges filed February 27, 2003, and, if so, the penalty that should be imposed.

Findings Of Fact Based on the oral and documentary evidence presented at the final hearing and on the entire record of this proceeding, the following findings of fact are made: The School Board is a duly-constituted school board charged with the duty to operate, control, and supervise all free public schools within the School District of Miami-Dade County, Florida. Article IX, Florida Constitution; Section 230.03, Florida Statutes (2002).3 At the times material to this proceeding, Mr. Lefkowitz taught emotionally handicapped and seriously emotionally disturbed students in North Miami Beach High's Bertha Abbess exceptional student education program. He has been employed by the School Board since 1993, and is currently employed under a professional services contract. At the times material to this proceeding, Mr. Lefkowitz and at least one other person were making a music video for a course they were taking at Florida International University. Alvarro Gutierrez was working with Mr. Lefkowitz on the video, and Mr. Gutierrez had chosen the girl who would sing and would choreograph the dances for the video. Mr. Gutierrez did not, however, have any dancers, and Mr. Lefkowitz told Mr. Gutierrez that he knew some girls "from school" who were dancers and that he would ask them if they wanted to dance in the video. J.D. was, at the times material to his proceeding, an 11th-grade student at North Miami Beach High, although she was not a student of Mr. Lefkowitz. Rather, J.D. met Mr. Lefkowitz in a school hallway, while she was selling candy for her French class, and they apparently had several conversations during school hours. In one of these conversations, Mr. Lefkowitz mentioned that he was filming a music video for a college class. J.D. asked if she could be in the video, and Mr. Lefkowitz agreed and asked J.D. if she had any friends who could also dance in the video. J.D. introduced Mr. Lefkowitz to her friend N.F. N.F. was, at the time, an 11th-grade student at North Miami Beach High, but she did not know Mr. Lefkowitz until J.D. introduced them. Mr. Lefkowitz did not know at the time he met her that N.F. was a student at North Miami Beach High. J.D. also introduced Mr. Lefkowitz to Glamour Legros, whom she knew because she and Ms. Legros attended the same church. Prior to introducing Mr. Lefkowitz to Ms. Legros, J.D. had told him on a number of occasions how much Ms. Legros wanted to meet him.4 Ms. Legros and N.F. shared an apartment. Ms. Legros was not a student at the times material to this proceeding, and she was older than N.F. and J.D. J.D., N.F., and Ms. Legros agreed to dance in the music video and went to Mr. Lefkowitz's apartment several times to discuss, rehearse, and shoot the video. Mr. Lefkowitz picked up J.D., N.F., and Ms. Legros and drove them to his apartment on the occasions when they were working on the video. Mr. Lefkowitz also took J.D. and her friends home on these occasions. M.D., J.D.'s brother and a student at North Miami Beach High at the time, went to Mr. Lefkowitz's apartment once, and H.D., another student at North Miami Beach High, was at Mr. Lefkowitz's apartment on at least one occasion, when she danced for the music video. These two students also rode with Mr. Lefkowitz in his car on at least one occasion. In addition to her visits to Mr. Lefkowitz's apartment and her rides in his car, J.D. spoke with Mr. Lefkowitz numerous times on the telephone. When working on the video, J.D. went to Mr. Lefkowitz's apartment with her friends. She was alone with Mr. Lefkowitz once, after her friends left Mr. Lefkowitz's apartment; Mr. Lefkowitz took her home after about an hour. Mr. Gutierrez did not observe Mr. Lefkowitz engage in any improper behavior with J.D. or her friends at Mr. Lefkowitz's apartment during the time they were discussing, rehearsing, and shooting the music video. On April 21, 2003, Ms. Legros called the police and she and N.F. reported that Mr. Lefkowitz had come to their apartment, beat on the door, and threatened them verbally. According to the police incident report, the police were dispatched at 10:09 p.m. and arrived at Ms. Legros's and N.F.'s apartment at 10:12 p.m. Mr. Lefkowitz had outpatient surgery on April 18, 2002. Mr. Lefkowitz's mother was with him at his apartment from April 18 through the morning of April 22, 2002, the day he returned to work. According to Ms. Lefkowitz, Mr. Lefkowitz was in bed, asleep, on the night of April 21, 2002. On April 22, 2002, Raymond Fontana, the principal of North Miami Beach High, received a telephone call from a woman who identified herself to Mr. Fontana's secretary as J.D.'s aunt and who told Mr. Fontana that an exceptional student education teacher named "Neil" was having a relationship with J.D., a student at North Miami Beach High; the caller also reported that the teacher had been involved in an "incident" that had been reported to the police. Ms. Legros was the person who called Mr. Fontana.5 Mr. Fontana called Allyn Bernstein, an assistant principal at North Miami Beach High, into his office and asked her to look into the allegations made by the caller. Dr. Bernstein called Mr. Lefkowitz into her office and, before she could say anything, Mr. Lefkowitz told her that he knew why she had summoned him, that an ex-girlfriend had threatened to make trouble for him because he wouldn't give her money. When Dr. Bernstein questioned Mr. Lefkowitz about his relationship with the student J.D., Mr. Lefkowitz denied knowing her. Dr. Bernstein also called J.D. into her office. In response to Dr. Bernstein's questions, J.D. denied knowing Mr. Lefkowitz. She stated that she did not have a social relationship with any teacher outside of school and that she had never met any staff member outside school. After Dr. Bernstein reported to Mr. Fontana that she believed that there might be "something there,"6 Mr. Fontana reported the matter to the school district personnel, who referred the matter to the Miami-Dade School Police Department, and an investigation was initiated. Once the investigation was initiated, Mr. Lefkowitz was placed on alternate assignment at his home effective May 3, 2002. The investigator, Detective Victor Hernandez, interviewed N.F., Ms. Legros, J.D., H.D., M.D., and Mr. Lefkowitz. During the course of his investigation, Detective Hernandez was told that Mr. Lefkowitz and N.F. had dated and that they had had sexual intercourse. When Detective Hernandez interviewed Mr. Lefkowitz, Mr. Lefkowitz denied that he knew either J.D. or N.F. In a report dated September 2, 2002, Detective Hernandez described his investigation and set forth the substance of the statements given by the witnesses. Detective Hernandez concluded that the charges that Mr. Lefkowitz had violated Rules 6B-1.001 and 6B-1.006, Florida Administrative Code, and School Board Rules 6Gx13-4.109 and 6Gx13-4A-1.21 were substantiated. A Conference-for-the-Record was held on October 2, 2002, with Paul Greenfield, District Director, presiding. Mr. Lefkowitz attended the Conference-for-the-Record, together with the School Board's Director of Region II and Mr. Fontana. Mr. Lefkowitz requested that his attorney be allowed to attend, but this request was denied.7 Mr. Greenfield reviewed Mr. Lefkowitz's history with the Miami-Dade County public school system and presented the results of the investigation. Mr. Lefkowitz denied having met J.D. and N.F. and denied that they were ever in his apartment. After the Conference-for-the-Record, Mr. Fontana recommended to the Superintendent of Region II that Mr. Lefkowitz's employment be terminated. Mr. Lefkowitz lied to Dr. Bernstein, to Detective Hernandez, and to the participants in the Conference-for-the- Record about his relationships with J.D. and N.F. because he knew it was improper for the students to be in his apartment and for him to associate with students outside of school. Mr. Lefkowitz expressed remorse at his behavior and acknowledged that his conduct was not appropriate. J.D. testified that she and Mr. Lefkowitz never dated or had sexual intercourse. Ms. Legros testified that she did not know whether Mr. Lefkowitz and J.D. had had sexual intercourse. She claimed, however, to have observed Mr. Lefkowitz and J.D. at Mr. Lefkowitz's apartment hugging and kissing and acting like "boyfriend and girlfriend to me."8 Ms. Legros has no personal knowledge that Mr. Lefkowitz had sexual relations with N.F., but testified that N.F. told Ms. Legros that she had had a relationship with Mr. Lefkowitz. An 11th-grade student testified at the hearing that he considered Mr. Lefkowitz to be a good teacher, a role model, and a teacher that he would remember after high school. Mr. Fontana testified that he thought Mr. Lefkowitz's effectiveness as a teacher had been impaired because of the "manner in which he dealt with students, having students come to his apartment, dealing with students that are out of the realm of his teaching responsibilities." Mr. Fontana observed that "once you breach that student/teacher relationship and you lose that professionalism I don't think you can ever go back and have the same degree of effectiveness as a teacher."9 In making his decision to recommend that Mr. Lefkowitz be terminated from his employment as a teacher, Mr. Fontana considered Mr. Lefkowitz's employment history with the Miami- Dade County public school system. Mr. Lefkowitz was twice referred for evaluation as to his medical fitness to perform his duties as a teacher and was twice found fit to perform these duties. Mr. Lefkowitz was the subject of three allegations of battery on a student, one in February 1995, one in February 1999, and one in March 1999; the February 1995 charge was substantiated,10 and Mr. Lefkowitz was given a verbal warning; the remaining two charges were unsubstantiated. Finally, in August 1995, Mr. Lefkowitz had an unacceptable annual evaluation, was given a TADS Category VII prescription in the area of Professional Responsibility, and successfully completed the prescription within the specified time. Summary The greater weight of the credible evidence presented by the School Board is insufficient to establish that Mr. Lefkowitz dated either J.D. or N.F. or that Mr. Lefkowitz had sexual intercourse with N.F. The School Board presented no direct evidence establishing that J.D. and Mr. Lefkowitz had a romantic relationship or that N.F. and Mr. Lefkowitz had a sexual relationship. The School Board relied exclusively on Ms. Legros's testimony to establish that these relationships existed,11 and most of her testimony was based on hearsay, not personal knowledge. Ms. Legros had no personal knowledge that N.F. had sexual relations with Mr. Lefkowitz, and the only behavior that Ms. Legros testified that she personally observed was Mr. Lefkowitz and J.D. in Mr. Lefkowitz's apartment hugging and kissing and, in Ms. Legros's estimation, acting like boyfriend and girlfriend. Ms. Legros is found not to be a particularly credible witness, and her uncorroborated testimony is not sufficiently persuasive to establish that Mr. Lefkowitz and J.D. more likely than not were dating or that the hugging and kissing, if she indeed observed such behavior, was sexual in nature. Both J.D. and Mr. Lefkowitz denied having a romantic relationship, but it is difficult to credit fully their testimony, given that both J.D. and Mr. Lefkowitz lied to School Board personnel about knowing one another and that Mr. Lefkowitz lied to School Board personnel about being acquainted with N.F. However, on reflection and after a careful review of the evidence, the testimony of J.D. and Mr. Lefkowitz is credited over that of Ms. Legros. The greater weight of the credible evidence presented by the School Board is not sufficient to establish that Mr. Lefkowitz telephoned N.F. on April 21, 2002, and threatened her or that he went to the apartment shared by Ms. Legros and N.F. on the night of April 21, 2002, and made threats to harm them. Mr. Lefkowitz's mother testified unequivocally that she was with Mr. Lefkowitz from April 19 through the morning of April 22, 2002, and that he was recovering from surgery and sleeping on the night of April 21, 2002. The School Board presented no evidence that Mr. Lefkowitz telephoned N.F. and threatened her, and Ms. Legros was the only witness to testify that Mr. Lefkowitz came to her apartment and made threats. The testimony of Mrs. Lefkowitz is credited over that of Ms. Legros.12 The evidence presented in this case is sufficient to establish that Mr. Lefkowitz failed to exercise the best professional judgment, failed to maintain the highest ethical standards, and used his position as a teacher to his personal advantage by recruiting young women students to perform as dancers in the music video he was filming as part of a college assignment. Mr. Lefkowitz admitted that he had engaged in inappropriate conduct: He had had a personal relationship outside of school with both J.D. and N.F.; J.D. and N.F. danced in a music video he made for a college project; J.D. and N.F. were in his apartment several times; and he drove J.D. and N.F. in his car to and from his apartment. The contents and tone of the written statement Mr. Lefkowitz adopted as his testimony supports an inference that he was on very familiar terms with both J.D. and N.F., and with Ms. Legros as well.13 Mr. Lefkowitz's poor judgment in developing significant social relationships outside of school with two female students at North Miami Beach High and his inappropriate behavior in having these students as guests in his car and in his apartment reflect poorly on him as a teacher employed by the School Board. Mr. Lefkowitz also failed to exercise the best professional judgment and to maintain the highest ethical standards with respect to his dealings with the School Board during the investigation of his conduct. Mr. Lefkowitz lied to Dr. Bernstein and Detective Hernandez and at the October 2, 2002, Conference-for-the-Record when he said he did not know J.D. or N.F., and he admitted at the final hearing that he lied because he knew that he should never have involved these students in making the music video, should never have given these students rides in his car, and should never have invited the students to his apartment. Mr. Lefkowitz's lack of truthfulness reflects poorly on him as a teacher employed by the School Board. The evidence presented by the School Board is also sufficient to establish that Mr. Lefkowitz engaged in one instance of inappropriate behavior involving students M.D. and H.D. Mr. Lefkowitz admitted that, on one occasion, he picked up these two students in his car and drove them to his apartment, where H.D. danced in the music video and M.D. observed Mr. Lefkowitz and cohorts filming the music video. Mr. Lefkowitz did not have repeated out-of-school contacts with these two students, as he did with J.D. and N.F., but his behavior with M.D. and H.D. reflected poorly on him as a teacher employed by the School Board. The evidence presented by the School Board, which consisted only of Mr. Fontana's conclusory and general statements, is not sufficient to establish that Mr. Lefkowitz's conduct impaired his effectiveness as a teacher in the Miami- Dade County public school system. The evidence presented by the School Board is, however, sufficient to permit an inference that Mr. Lefkowitz's effectiveness as a teacher was impaired. Mr. Lefkowitz encouraged students to develop personal relationships with him and to spend significant amounts of time with him in his apartment. Even though J.D., the young woman with whom he was primarily involved, was not a student in his class, his willingness to become involved with this student and her friends brings his personal and professional judgment into question and necessarily affects the school administration's assessment of his fitness for supervising high school students. It may also be inferred that Mr. Lefkowitz's effectiveness as an employee of the School Board was also impaired because he lied to the principal and assistant principal of his school and to the regional superintendent of the Miami-Dade County public school system about even knowing J.D. By not being truthful with the school system administrators, Mr. Lefkowitz diminished his credibility as a professional educator.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Miami-Dade County School Board enter a final order; Finding that Neil D. Lefkowitz is guilty of having committed misconduct in office and of violating School Board Rules 6Gx13-4-1.09 and 6Gx13-4A-1.21; Suspending Mr. Lefkowitz without pay for a period of 24 months, retroactive to the date on which the School Board suspended him from his employment without pay; and Imposing such conditions on Mr. Lefkowitz upon his return to employment as the School Board deems appropriate. DONE AND ENTERED this 31th day of July, 2003, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S PATRICIA HART MALONO Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 31th day of July, 2003.

Florida Laws (2) 120.569120.57
# 4
PAM STEWART, AS COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION vs TRACY FARTHING, 17-006737PL (2017)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Jacksonville, Florida Dec. 18, 2017 Number: 17-006737PL Latest Update: Dec. 23, 2024
# 5
JOHN L. WINN, AS COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION vs SHERYOL GOODRUM DANIELS, 07-003718PL (2007)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Fort Lauderdale, Florida Aug. 20, 2007 Number: 07-003718PL Latest Update: Dec. 23, 2024
# 6
DADE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD vs. JOHN W. JACKSON, 87-004159 (1987)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 87-004159 Latest Update: Apr. 27, 1988

Findings Of Fact Respondent, John W. Jackson (Jackson), is a continuing contract teacher, and has been employed by Petitioner, School Board of Dade County (School Board), since 1967. During the past seven years, Jackson has been assigned to Miami Gardens Elementary School, where for the 1986-87 school year he taught fifth grade. On April 3, 1987, Lakisha Collins, a 9 year old third grade student at Miami Gardens Elementary School, reported to the principal that Jackson had picked her up, placed her on his lap, lifted her dress, and kissed her. As a consequence of these charges, Jackson was immediately removed from his position as a classroom teacher, and reassigned to the area office. On September 9, 1987, the School Board suspended Jackson without pay, and initiated this proceeding to terminate his employment. Jackson filed a timely request for a formal hearing, and the matter was referred to the Division of Administrative Hearings for resolution. The incident of April 3, 1987 In addition to his duties as a classroom teacher, Jackson also filled the position of supervisor for free play time on the physical education (P.E.) field during the preschool hours of 7:30 a.m. and 8:20 a.m. During free play, Jackson distributed P.E. equipment to the students and supervised their activities until their teachers arrived to collect them at the beginning of the school day. On April 3, 1987, Jackson opened the P.E. shed as usual to distribute P.E. equipment, and seated himself on a stool in front of the shed from which he could supervise the students' activities. Proximate to the shed was a hard court area where a number of students, including Lakisha Collins (Lakisha), were playing. At approximately 8:00 a.m. that morning, Jackson motioned for Lakisha to come to him. Why Jackson summoned Lakisha is a matter of serious dispute. Jackson avers that he summoned her to admonish her for having called him an "old black mother" after he had interceded in dispute she had with her playmates. Lakisha denies having called Jackson any name, and professes to have no idea why he summoned her. On this point, Lakisha's testimony is not credible. The proof demonstrated that on a prior occasion Jackson had to admonish Lakisha. Some months previous to April 3, 1986, Lakisha had given Jackson "the finger" after he had stopped a fight between her and another girl. Jackson telephoned Lakisha's mother and reported her conduct. As a consequence, Lakisha was punished by her mother for fighting, but not the vulgar gesture she made toward Jackson. Regarding the incident of April 3, 1986, Lakisha conceded on cross examination that, after she had been summoned by Jackson, he told her he was going to call her mother, and that she knew then she was going to get punished again. While under subsequent examination she denied having so testified, or claimed to have misunderstood the line of questioning, the record demonstrates that she did so testify and that the line of questioning was not subject to any misunderstanding. Based on the totality of the evidence I therefore find that Jackson summoned Lakisha because she uttered, or he thought she uttered, a profanity. I further find that, upon being confronted by Jackson, Lakisha was concerned that he would report the incident to her mother, and that she would be again punished by her mother. What occurred after Jackson summoned Lakisha is also a matter of serious dispute. Under the circumstances, however, I credit Jackson's testimony as the more credible and persuasive. While Jackson, seated on his stool, was trying to find out why Lakisha had uttered a profanity, she turned her back to him and was resting against his knee or knees, as he was holding her by both arms at her sides. While Jackson may have leaned around Lakisha to address her, he did not kiss or attempt to kiss her. Nor did he, as contended by the School Board, place her on his lap, lift her dress, touch her vagina, or otherwise commit any impropriety to her person. Jackson's prior conduct In July 1980, a parent complained that Jackson had struck her son on the buttock hard enough to leave a mark. As a consequence, a conference for the record was held and Jackson was admonished not to slap, hit or touch any child as a disciplinary measure. In October, 1983, Jackson was accused of having touched a female student on the hip and ear. Though the charges proved unsubstantiated, Jackson was again admonished not to touch any student in an improper manner. During the 1986-87 school year, the proof demonstrates that Jackson routinely used a pointer, yardstick, or his hand to tap students on the head, arm, or leg to get their attention when they were misbehaving. The taps were, however, light and not of sufficient force to harm the students. 1/ During the same time period, Jackson frequently kissed students, male and female, on the forehead or cheek when they had mastered a new skill or done well in a subject area. Occasionally, Jackson would also place a female student on his knee and kiss her cheek or hug her for the same reasons. While not done in a vulgar or personal way, Jackson's affectionate manner of complimenting students was not always well received. Not infrequently, the female students who were placed on his knee and hugged or kissed reacted negatively to his efforts and struggled to be freed. In January 1987, Jackson's actions, as discussed in paragraphs 14-16, supra, came to the attention of the principal of Miami Gardens Elementary School. As a consequence of his inquiry into the matter, Jackson was issued a letter of reprimand and was again admonished to never put his hands on any of the children to discipline them or touch them in an improper manner.

Florida Administrative Code (3) 6B-1.0016B-1.0066B-4.009
# 7
PAM STEWART, AS COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION vs SONJA BURTON, 18-001169PL (2018)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Miami, Florida Mar. 05, 2018 Number: 18-001169PL Latest Update: Dec. 23, 2024
# 8
PAM STEWART, AS COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION vs MEGAN FAIRCHILD, 16-003895PL (2016)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Ocala, Florida Jul. 13, 2016 Number: 16-003895PL Latest Update: Dec. 23, 2024
# 9
JOHN L. WINN, AS COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION vs LYNETTE CARTER, 05-003403PL (2005)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Tampa, Florida Sep. 22, 2005 Number: 05-003403PL Latest Update: Dec. 23, 2024
# 10

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