Gerig v. Board of Education of Central School District, R-III

841 S.W.2d 731, 1992 Mo. App. LEXIS 1580, 1992 WL 276558
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedOctober 13, 1992
Docket61271
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 841 S.W.2d 731 (Gerig v. Board of Education of Central School District, R-III) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gerig v. Board of Education of Central School District, R-III, 841 S.W.2d 731, 1992 Mo. App. LEXIS 1580, 1992 WL 276558 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

CRIST, Judge.

Appellant (Board) appeals from a judgment of the circuit court which reversed the decision of Board terminating the employment of Respondent (Teacher). Teacher was terminated for immoral conduct rendering him unfit to teach. We reverse the judgment of the circuit court and remand to the circuit court, directing it to reinstate the Board’s decision to terminate Teacher’s employment.

The litigants have followed an expensive and torturous path from a decision of the Board in 1986 to the present. The Board rendered its decision on May 21, 1986. Teacher appealed to the circuit court. The circuit court granted a summary judgment in favor of Board on a collateral issue. Teacher appealed to this court. On December 20, 1988, this court reversed the decision of the circuit court and remanded the ease to the circuit court. Gerig v. Board of Education of Central School District, 767 S.W.2d 586 (Mo.App.1988). The circuit court reversed the decision of the Board. The case is in this court for the second time.

We consider the evidence in a light most favorable to the Board’s decision, along with all reasonable inferences supporting it. Burgess v. Ferguson Reorganized School District, 820 S.W.2d 651, 652 (Mo.App.1991).

Teacher was a tenured teacher who was discharged after a contested hearing. He *733 taught English and media classes at the high school. As part of a media class assignment, students submitted news stories, features, cartoons and advertisements to be included in a publication entitled the Buschwacker Times. The publication was distributed on April 1 and was intended for use by the class only. Teacher edited the articles removing “four letter” words which he considered inappropriate, then typed and printed the paper and distributed it to the class.

The publication in final form contained some articles appropriate for a high school journalism class project, and some materials which were not appropriate. In the latter category were articles and advertisements which included explicit, crude and tasteless sexual references, articles which promoted, or at least condoned, the use of drugs, and articles accusing the Flat River police of substance abuse. Teacher critiqued the material to the class indicating the unacceptability of some of the material. He did not retrieve all copies of the publication after the class, and some copies achieved a general circulation within the school and the community at large.

Upon the matter being brought to his attention, the superintendent of the district suspended Teacher and served him with a notice of charges.

Board urges reversal of the circuit court’s judgment which reversed the Board’s decision to terminate Teacher’s employment. Board contends its decision that Teacher had engaged in immoral conduct was supported by competent and substantial evidence on the whole record.

We review the decision of the Board, not that of the circuit court. City of Cabool v. State Bd. of Mediation, 689 S.W.2d 51, 53 (Mo.banc 1985). Our review is limited to whether Board’s decision is supported by competent and substantial evidence on the whole record. Carron v. Ste. Genevieve School Dist., 800 S.W.2d 64, 67 (Mo.App.1990). There is a strong presumption of validity in favor of Board’s decision, and that decision cannot be reversed simply because we might have reached a different initial conclusion. Id. The strong presumption in favor of Board’s decision can only be overcome by a clear and convincing showing the Board’s decision was arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable or an abuse of discretion. Aubuchon v. Gasconade County R-I School Dist., 541 S.W.2d 322, 326 (Mo.App.1976).

Our scope of review is less restricted when an agency’s interpretation or application of a law or legal standard is challenged. “In such case the reviewing court may independently weigh the evidence and resolve factual issues, but in so doing the court shall give due weight to the opportunity of the agency to observe the witnesses, and to the expertness and experience of the particular agency.” Lile v. Hancock Place School District, 701 S.W.2d 500, 504 (Mo.App.1985).

A tenured teacher may be terminated for one of six statutorily enumerated reasons. RSMo 168.114 (1986). Teacher was terminated for “immoral conduct.” Under the statute, “immoral conduct” means “immoral conduct rendering the teacher unfit to teach.” Schmidt v. Board of Education, 712 S.W.2d 45, 48 (Mo.App.1986).

Teacher was responsible for the publication and dissemination of the Buschwacker. He read, and approved for publication, every article and advertisement contained therein. He understood the meaning and import of each and every article and advertisement which he approved for publication. He edited the submitted material and typed articles into the school computer.

In addition, he authored the following introduction:

Inside this April 1 edition of this newspaper, readers will find a variety of news, features, cartoons, editorials and ads. You will be thrilled to read the latest obituaries, two exciting advice columns, and the latest in sports, both local and national.
An editorial will really make you think about an important topic, also. (Emphasis added.)

The “advice column” included:

Dear Rollo:
Lately I haven’t been having sexual intercourse as much as I think I could be. *734 I want to, but my mate must not find me as attractive as he used to. What can I do.
Confused
Dear Confused:
You need to get out more and leave the stupid zero at home. Go party, smoke some pot, get drunk and do all you can to make up for all the time you lost with your mate. (Emphasis added.)
Dear Rollo:
My wife last night closed up and I got confused and I also got stuck. Please help me.
In Pain
Dear In:
Try going to your nearest drug store and buying some contraceptive jelly or Vaseline and go at it. I’m sure you won’t get confused or stuck again.
Dear Rollo:
Lately I’ve had a problem.

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

Related

Homa v. Carthage R-IX School District
345 S.W.3d 266 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2011)
Loeffelman v. Board of Education
134 S.W.3d 637 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2004)
Division of Youth Services v. Hopson
933 S.W.2d 917 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1996)
Cartwright v. Wells Fargo Armored Services
921 S.W.2d 165 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1996)
Boley v. Board of Education
908 S.W.2d 178 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1995)
Youngman v. Doerhoff
890 S.W.2d 330 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
841 S.W.2d 731, 1992 Mo. App. LEXIS 1580, 1992 WL 276558, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gerig-v-board-of-education-of-central-school-district-r-iii-moctapp-1992.