Summerfield v. Windsor Unified School District

116 Cal. Rptr. 2d 233, 95 Cal. App. 4th 1026, 161 Educ. L. Rep. 566, 2002 Daily Journal DAR 1213, 2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1004, 2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 1043
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal
DecidedJanuary 31, 2002
DocketA094488
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 116 Cal. Rptr. 2d 233 (Summerfield v. Windsor Unified School District) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Summerfield v. Windsor Unified School District, 116 Cal. Rptr. 2d 233, 95 Cal. App. 4th 1026, 161 Educ. L. Rep. 566, 2002 Daily Journal DAR 1213, 2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1004, 2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 1043 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

Opinion

PARRILLI, J.

Although amendments to Education Code section 44911 1 have been in effect for close to 20 years, no appellate court has interpreted them. This case requires us to do so. Lori Summerfield successfully petitioned the trial court for a writ of mandate directing the Windsor Unified School District and its governing board (collectively the District) to employ her as a permanent certificated teacher and compensate her for accrued benefits and backpay. Relying on section 44911, the District argued the two years Summerfield spent teaching under emergency permits (§ 44300) could not be counted toward the time necessary for her to attain permanent status, and thus the District had full discretion to terminate her employment when it did.

Considering the relevant statutory language and legislative history, we agree with the District’s interpretation and reverse the order issuing a writ of mandate. Under section 44911, time spent teaching under an emergency teaching credential may not be counted in computing an employee’s progress toward permanent status unless the employee is credentialed in another state and demonstrates adequate basic skills proficiency pending successful completion of the California Basic Educational Skills Test (CBEST). 2

Background

The District hired Summerfield as a long-term substitute teacher in September 1996. Because Summerfield did not have a teaching credential, the District helped her obtain an “Emergency 30-Day Substitute Teaching Permit” from the Commission on Teacher Credentialing, which authorized her *1029 to teach as a substitute for up to 30 days. In October 1996, the District changed Summerfield from a “substitute” to a “temporary” teacher and assigned her to replace a teacher gone on a leave of absence. Summerfield taught in this assignment for the remainder of the 1996-1997 school year under an “Emergency Long Term Multiple Subject Teaching Permit.” The District initially rehired Summerfield as a temporary teacher for the following school year but in October 1997 changed her classification from “temporary” to “probationary.” Another “Emergency Long Term Multiple Subject Teaching Permit” authorized Summerfield to continue teaching in the District throughout the 1997-1998 school year.

On March 9, 1998, near the end of her second year teaching in the District, the director of Summerfield’s school informed her that she had successfully completed her probationary period and would be reclassified as a tenured teacher in the upcoming 1998-1999 school year. However, a month later, the District advised Summerfield that it believed her service under emergency teaching credentials did not count in her progress toward permanent employment status. Thus, the District concluded, Summerfield could not be considered a first year probationary teacher until she obtained a nonemergency credential. She did so in July 1998, when the Commission on Teacher Credentialing issued her a “Preliminary Multiple Subject Teaching Credential” valid until August 1, 2003.

The District rehired Summerfield for the 1998-1999 school year, classifying her as a first year probationary employee. However, on March 3, 1999, the District notified Summerfield that her employment would be terminated in June and she would not be reemployed for the 1999-2000 school year. Summerfield moved to Florida in July 1999 and has not taught school in California since that date.

Discussion

In any California school district with an average daily attendance of 250 or more, a teacher who completes two consecutive school years as a probationary employee and is reelected for a third year becomes “a permanent employee of the district” at the beginning of the third year. (§ 44929.21, subd. (b).) School districts have complete discretion regarding the reelection of probationary employees. They may choose not to reelect a second-year probationary teacher without any showing of cause or statement of reasons, so long as they notify the teacher no later than March 15 of the teacher’s second year of the decision not to reelect. (Board, of Education v. Round Valley Teachers Assn. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 269, 279 [52 Cal.Rptr.2d 115, 914 P.2d 193]; § 44929.21, subd. (b).) Any employee not given notice of nonreelection by March 15 “shall be deemed reelected for the next succeeding school year.” (§ 44929.21, subd. (b).)

*1030 Summerfield taught for a total of three consecutive years in the District. Since she received no notice'of a non-reelection decision during her second year of employment (i.e., the 1997-1998 school year), Summerfield claims she became a permanent employee of the District by operation of law at the commencement of the third year. As a permanent employee, she could not be summarily terminated by the District’s non-reelection notice of March 3, 1999. However, the District responds that the time Summerfield worked under emergency teaching credentials does not count toward fulfilling her mandatory two-year probationary term. (See Fleice v. Chualar Union Elementary School Dist. (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 886, 893 [254 Cal.Rptr. 54] [two-year probationary period is mandated by Education Code and beyond district’s power to shorten].) The District bases this conclusion on section 44911, which states:

“Service by a person under a provisional credential shall not be included in computing the service required as a prerequisite to attainment of, or eligibility to, classification as a permanent employee of a school district.
“This section shall not be applicable to teachers granted a one-year emergency credential under the conditions specified in subdivision (b) of Section 44252 and subdivision (h) of Section 44830.”

I. “Provisional Credentials” Include Emergency Teaching Permits

Focusing on the first paragraph, Summerfield claims section 44911 does not apply because she worked for the District under emergency permits, which she asserts are not the same thing as “provisional credentials.”

The history of California’s teacher credentialing statutes and regulations was discussed in some detail in California Teachers Assn. v. Commission on Teacher Credentialing (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 1469 [10 Cal.Rptr.2d 126]. Under former section 13117 of the Education Code of 1959, the Commission on Teacher Credentialing had the power to issue “provisional credentials” in accordance with certain regulations. (7 Cal.App.4th at p. 1472, citing Stats. 1959, ch. 2, § 3, p. 909.) In 1970, the Legislature replaced section 13117 with section 13126, which authorized the issuance of “emergency credentials” and stated: “With the exception of this chapter, any reference in any law or regulation to a ‘provisional credential’ shall be deemed to mean an ‘emergency credential.’ ” (Stats. 1970, ch. 557, § 3, p. 1086-1087, former § 13126.) In 1977, section 13126 became section 44254. (Stats. 1976, ch. *1031 1010, § 2, pp. 3366-3367, operative Apr.

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

Related

Borikas v. Alameda Unified School District
214 Cal. App. 4th 135 (California Court of Appeal, 2013)
Hoschler v. Sacramento City Unified School District
57 Cal. Rptr. 3d 115 (California Court of Appeal, 2007)
Cal. Teachers Ass'n v. Vallejo City Unified School Dist.
56 Cal. Rptr. 3d 712 (California Court of Appeal, 2007)
California Teachers Ass'n v. Vallejo City Unified School District
149 Cal. App. 4th 135 (California Court of Appeal, 2007)
Bakersfield Elementary Teachers Ass'n v. Bakersfield City School District
52 Cal. Rptr. 3d 486 (California Court of Appeal, 2006)
Opinion No. (2006)
California Attorney General Reports, 2006
Peoples v. San Diego Unified School District
41 Cal. Rptr. 3d 383 (California Court of Appeal, 2006)
Motevalli v. Los Angeles Unified School District
18 Cal. Rptr. 3d 562 (California Court of Appeal, 2004)
Culbertson v. San Gabriel Unified School District
18 Cal. Rptr. 3d 234 (California Court of Appeal, 2004)
Smith v. Governing Board of Elk Grove Unified School District
16 Cal. Rptr. 3d 1 (California Court of Appeal, 2004)
Fine v. Los Angeles Unified School District
10 Cal. Rptr. 3d 876 (California Court of Appeal, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
116 Cal. Rptr. 2d 233, 95 Cal. App. 4th 1026, 161 Educ. L. Rep. 566, 2002 Daily Journal DAR 1213, 2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1004, 2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 1043, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/summerfield-v-windsor-unified-school-district-calctapp-2002.