Clark County School District v. Beebe

533 P.2d 161, 91 Nev. 165, 1975 Nev. LEXIS 576, 9 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 10,030, 16 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1694
CourtNevada Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 17, 1975
DocketNo. 7690
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 533 P.2d 161 (Clark County School District v. Beebe) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Clark County School District v. Beebe, 533 P.2d 161, 91 Nev. 165, 1975 Nev. LEXIS 576, 9 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 10,030, 16 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1694 (Neb. 1975).

Opinion

OPINION

By the Court,

Mowbray, J.:

The principal issues presented on this appeal are whether the Nevada Fair Employment Practices Act as amended by chapter 577, Statutes of Nevada 1973, has nullified the Clark County School District’s policy of forcing the involuntary [167]*167retirement of its teachers on the sole basis of age, and, if so, when such nullification became effective.

1. William Beebe, the respondent, had been a teacher in Clark County since 1960. Beebe attained the age of 65 years during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1973. The policy of the Clark County School District, as set forth in District Policy and Regulation 4411, adopted June 25, 1964, provides for compulsory retirement of certified employees at the end of the fiscal year in which the age of 65 is attained.1 Pursuant to this regulation, Beebe was notified by the District in November 1972 that he would be involuntarily retired in June 1973.

Beebe filed a grievance with the District, objecting to his retirement, on the ground that “[t]his policy, by contract or otherwise, will be against the public policy of the State of Nevada, and contrary to the law at the time grievance’s discharge is to be effective.”

The District rejected Beebe’s grievance, and he filed a writ of review in the district court. The court below found that the District’s Regulation 4411 was in direct conflict with the 1973 Nevada Fair Employment Practices Act and, consequently, void. The court ordered Beebe reinstated as a classroom teacher.

2. Assembly Bill 543 (amending NRS 281.370, among other statutes) was introduced in the Legislature on March 8, 1973. The bill was approved on April 25, 1973, effective July 1, 1973. Stats. Nev. 1973, ch. 577, § 2, at 980-981.2 Section [168]*1682 of NRS 281.370 as amended provides that State, county, or municipal departments, agencies, boards, or appointing officers thereof shall not discharge from employment any person because of age. The district court ruled that the amendment nullified the District’s Regulation 4411. We agree.

The District argues on appeal that, since NRS 281.370, subsection 2, fails to name specifically school districts as one of the agencies enumerated therein, District is not bound by the age discrimination proscription of the statute. We do not agree. The pertinent language of the statute barring age discrimination is directed to “State, county or municipal departments, agencies, boards or appointing officers thereof . . .” (emphasis added). NRS 281.370(2), infra. Certainly, a school district may be considered a municipal department within the meaning of the statute, and the school board, a board within the statute. NRS 43.080 defines a municipality as follows: “ ‘Municipality’ means the State of Nevada, or any corporation, instrumentality or other agency thereof, or any incorporated city or town, any unincorporated city or town, or any county school district, . . .” (emphasis added).3

We conclude and so hold that District is bound by the mandate of the statute prohibiting age discrimination. Each school district, through its board of trustees, is given such reasonable and necessary powers as may be required to attain the ends for which the public schools are established. NRS 386.350.4 However, no board of trustees may enforce a policy or rule [169]*169that is inconsistent with the law. NRS 386.360.5 This means that school districts may not retire school teachersi and certified employees involuntarily on the basis of age. The district may, however, discharge any teacher, regardless of age, upon the grounds enumerated in NRS 391.312.6

3. The court below found that Beebe’s retirement began at the end of the fiscal year, on June 30, 1973, or “simultaneously” with the effective date of chapter 577, Statutes of Nevada 1973, July 1, 1973. We disagree. NRS 354.526 defines a fiscal year as the 12-month period beginning on the [170]*170first day of July and ending on the last day of June.7 Respondent Beebe suggests that his retirement commenced July 1, 12:00 a.m., and that, therefore, he is covered by the amendment to the statute barring age discrimination. We, however, construe “end of fiscal year’ to be June 30, 1973. Otherwise, there would be constant conflict between policies in effect during one fiscal year and amended the following fiscal year.

There is nothing in the statute which indicates either expressly or impliedly that the Legislature intended that it be applied retrospectively. County of Clark v. Roosevelt Title Ins. Co., 80 Nev. 530, 396 P.2d 844 (1964); Walsh v. Clark County School Dist., 82 Nev. 414, 419 P.2d 774 (1966). Unless the contrary plainly appears, such statutes operate prospectively only. Fitch v. Elko County, 8 Nev. 271 (1873).

Construing the applicable legislative pronouncements according to the normal acceptation of their words, we are constrained to hold erroneous the lower court’s determination that Beebe’s retirement and chapter 577, Statutes of Nevada 1973, were effective at the same moment. If the Legislature wishes to extend the benefits of its 1973 Act to those situated as Beebe, it may adopt appropriate legislation to do so during its current session.

On the basis of the statute as adopted, however, the judgment reinstating Beebe must be reversed.

Gunderson, C. J., and Batjer, Zenoff, and Thompson, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ramacciotti v. Ramacciotti
795 P.2d 988 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
533 P.2d 161, 91 Nev. 165, 1975 Nev. LEXIS 576, 9 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 10,030, 16 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1694, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clark-county-school-district-v-beebe-nev-1975.