Fine

Fine v. Los Angeles Unified School District

Good Law
10 Cal. Rptr. 3d 876·116 Cal. App. 4th 1070·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 330·2004 Daily Journal DAR 3221·2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2220
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 12, 2004B165201California3,983 words

Opinion

Opinion

Boland, J.

SUMMARY

This case presents the question whether an elementary teacher for the Los Angeles Unified School District was entitled to classification as a permanent employee, or whether she was a probationary employee whom the District could, in its discretion, choose not to reemploy for the ensuing school year. The answer to the question turns on whether the teacher’s status as a probationary employee began on the validity date of her preliminary teaching credential, or on the date stated in her contract with the District, which was executed shortly after she actually received the credential and presented it to the District. We conclude that the Education Code does not require the District to classify the teacher as probationary retroactive to the validity date of her teaching credential. Accordingly, the teacher’s probationary status began on the date stated in her contract; she was not entitled to classification as a permanent employee; and the District timely notified her of its decision not to reemploy her.

FACTUAL, LEGAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Marsha Fine began working as a teacher at the Broadous Avenue Elementary School in 1996. At that time, she served under an…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.