George E. Vanelli, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Reynolds School District No. 7, Defendants-Appellees/cross-Appellants

Good Law
667 F.2d 773·2 Educ. L. Rep. 366·1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 22478
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 21, 198279-4172, 79-4205California4,395 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kennedy, J.

In this case we examine again the procedural protections afforded by the due process clause when a public employee is dismissed. Appellant, a high school teacher, was dismissed at the midpoint of a one-year contract. The board dismissed him without a pre-termination hearing but did conduct a full evidentiary hearing one month later. It affirmed its earlier decision to terminate.

Appellant brought this section 1983 action against the district and board members, alleging that both liberty and property interests were damaged because the evidentiary hearing was insufficient and because a pre-termination hearing was also necessary. The district court found that permanent dismissal could be sustained because the evidentiary hearing was adequate, but assessed relatively minor damages for failure to hold a pre-termination hearing. In this court, the appellant employee insists that the subsequent hearing was insufficient to sustain the dismissal. The district cross-appeals, contending that no property or liberty interest was implicated at all.

We agree with the district court that the post-termination hearing can support the permanent dismissal but that some damages are proper for…

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.