08-001596TTS
Orange County School Board vs.
James Deshay
Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Friday, December 19, 2008.
Recommended Order on Friday, December 19, 2008.
1STATE OF FLORIDA
4DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
8ORANGE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, )
13)
14Petitioner, )
16)
17vs. ) Case No. 08-1596
22)
23JAMES DESHAY, )
26)
27Respondent. )
29)
30RECOMMENDED ORDER
32Pursuant to notice, a final hearing was conducted in this
42case on August 27 and 28, 2008, in Orlando, Florida, before
53Administrative Law Judge R. Bruce McKibben of the Division of
63Administrative Hearings.
65APPEARANCES
66For Petitioner: Brian F. Moes, Esquire
72Orange County School Board
76445 West Ameila Street
80Post Office Box 271
84Orlando, Florida 32802-1129
87For Respondent: Tobe M. Lev, Esquire
93Egan, Lev & Siwica, P.A.
98231 East Colonial Drive
102Orlando, Florida 32801
105STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE
109The issue in this case is whether Respondent violated
118misconduct rules relating to educators and, if so, whether
127discipline, up to and including dismissal, should be imposed by
137Petitioner.
138PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
140Respondent is a professional service contract teacher with
148the Orange County Public Schools ("OCPS"). On or about
159March 25, 2008, Petitioner filed an Administrative Complaint
167against Respondent alleging violations of an express work rule
176of OCPS and other enumerated offenses, including misconduct in
185office, willful neglect of duty, conduct unbecoming a public
194employee, and breach of employment agreement. Respondent denied
202the allegations and requested a formal administrative hearing
210before the Division of Administrative Hearings.
216At the final hearing held on the dates specified above,
226Petitioner called seven witnesses: Eric Close, technology
233coordinator at Winter Park High School ("WPHS"); Susan Gluckman,
244technology representative at WPHS; Andrew Huffman, Systems
251Engineer III; Michael Byrne, assistant principal at WPHS; Demiki
260Joiner, assistant principal at WPHS; Gina Dole, senior manager
269of OCPS Employee Relations; and William Gordon, principal at
278WPHS. Petitioner offered the following exhibits which were
286received into evidence: 1, 3 through 5, 6a, 6b, 6c, 8a, 8b, 8c,
29910 through 12, 17, and 19 through 22, and 24. Respondent
310presented the testimony of two witnesses: Betty Crawford,
318retired OCPS teacher; and Mary Woolridge, retired OCPS employee.
327Respondent also offered the following exhibits which were
335received into evidence: 3, 4, 6 through 11, 15, 16, and 20.
347A single joint exhibit was also accepted into evidence.
356At the close of the evidentiary portion of the final
366hearing, the parties requested and were allowed 20 days from the
377filing of the hearing transcript within which to file their
387respective proposed recommended orders. A three-volume hearing
394Transcript was filed on November 3, 2008. The parties then
404requested and were given until December 1, 2008, to file their
415post-hearing submissions. Both parties filed Proposed
421Recommended Orders containing proposed findings of fact and
429conclusions of law. The parties' proposals have been carefully
438considered during the preparation of this Recommended Order.
446At the time its Proposed Recommended Order was filed,
455Respondent requested leave to file color graphs in conjunction
464with its written submission. Petitioner opposed the motion.
472Upon review of the motion, the response and the graphs, the
483undersigned determined that the motion would be granted to the
493extent the graphs are merely demonstrative of statements from
502the final hearing. To the extent the graphs indicate data
512outside the testimony and exhibits accepted at final hearing,
521they will be ignored and will not serve as a basis for any
534finding of fact herein.
538FINDINGS OF FACT
5411. Petitioner, Orange County School Board, is responsible
549for the operation of all public schools within the Orange County
560Public School system. Petitioner is responsible for hiring and
569monitoring qualified individuals who teach students within the
577OCPS system. Teachers may be either Professional Service
585Contract employees or employed under an annual contract.
593Professional service contract employees are entitled to all
601rights, privileges, and responsibilities set forth in the
609Contract Between [Petitioner] and The Orange County Classroom
617Teachers Association.
6192. Respondent received his teaching certificate in the
627State of Florida in 1985 and has taught school in Orange County
639since that time. At all times material hereto, Respondent was
649employed as a Professional Service Contract employee with OCPS.
658Respondent transferred to WPHS at the beginning of the 2003-2004
668school year. Prior to that time, Respondent had been a teacher
679at Jones High School, also within the OCPS system.
6883. Jones High School is a predominantly African-American
696school which had received two consecutive "F" grades from the
706Department of Education due to student achievement (or lack
715thereof) on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT).
723WPHS, on the other hand, was a predominantly white school which
734had not received "F" grades relating to the FCAT. 1
7444. Respondent was transferred to WPHS to teach Algebra I,
754primarily to students who were struggling with Algebra. His
763students were, by and large, tenth graders who were taking
773Algebra I, which normally is a ninth grade class. Some of the
785students had previously failed Algebra; others were taking the
794class for the first time.
7995. When Respondent was assessed by an assistant principal
808for school year 2004-2005, he received an "ER" grade in planning
819and delivering instruction. "ER" meant effective, but with
827recommendations. A comment to his assessment stated,
"834Mr. DeShay needs to work on motivating his students so they
845will want to perform to higher standards within his class."
8556. The following year (2005-2006), Respondent received
862another "ER" grade in planning and delivering instructions.
870This time, the comment stated, "Mr. DeShay needs to plan his
881instructional time so that students are constantly engaged
889during the period. This will also assist in classroom
898management problems."
9007. Because Respondent received two consecutive "ER"
907grades, he was placed on a Professional Improvement Plan (PIP)
917for the 2006-2007 school year. The PIP targeted three areas of
928competencies: classroom management and discipline; planning and
935delivery of instruction; and professional responsibility. The
942PIP commenced on October 26, 2006, and was to run for a period
955of 90 school days, i.e., until April 19, 2007.
9648. At the end of the PIP period, Respondent had not made
976improvements in the areas of "planning and delivery of
985instruction" and "classroom management and discipline." As a
993result, Respondent received a grade of "NI" on his final
1003assessment. "NI" means the instructor needs improvement in
1011order to meet expected standards. The PIP was then extended
1021another 30 school days, commencing at the start of the 2007-2008
1032school year.
10349. Respondent had never received an "NI" grade on an
1044evaluation before the final assessment in April 2007.
1052Respondent had never been disciplined during the course of his
1062employment with the OCPS system prior to coming to WPHS. He had
1074a reputation as an effective and respected teacher while at
1084Jones High School and previously.
108910. During the 2007-2008 school year, while Respondent was
1098still under the extended PIP, Eric Close, a technology
1107coordinator at WPHS, had occasion to log on to Respondent's
1117school computer. Close was, at the request of another teacher,
1127seeking to retrieve a copy of math software believed to exist on
1139Respondent's H drive, located on the school network. While
1148Close was retrieving the software, he noticed a Word document
1158entitled, "Your Neighbor is Watching You." Upon a quick scan of
1169the Word document, Close ascertained that it contained
1177potentially inappropriate material. Close reported his finding
1184to his superior and to administration.
119011. When administration reviewed the "Neighbor" story, it
1198was determined to be objectionable and inappropriate due to its
1208content. The story was about a somewhat benign voyeuristic
1217encounter between neighbors, but was certainly not appropriate
1225for high school students. It did, in fact, violate
1234administration's interpretation of OCPS Management
1239Directive A-9.
124112. Management Directive A-9 is a work rule prohibiting
1250employees from using school computers for certain specified
1258activities or purposes. Pertinent portions of Management
1265Directive A-9 state:
12683. Employee Access to Network
1273* * *
1276d. District employee shall not conduct a
1283private enterprise, defined as offering or
1289providing goods or services for personal use
1296on school time. District equipment or
1302supplies, including technology, computers
1306and other equipment . . . may not be used
1316for private business . . . unless expressly
1324authorized by the Superintendent . . .
1331e. The District authorizes employees to
1337use District computer technology resources
1342and data bases for assigned
1347responsibilities. These resources shall be
1352used by employees to enhance job
1358productivity as it relates to District
1364business. These resources shall be used for
1371District-related purposes and not for
1376personal use or gain or for the benefit of
1385private, "for profit" or "not for profit"
1392organizations.
13934. Network Security and Acceptable Use
1399a. Employees shall not use the Web or FTP
1408to search or download obscene or
1414inappropriate material from the Internet.
1419Employees using District computers who
1424discover they have connected with a web site
1432that contains sexually explicit, racist,
1437violent or other potentially offensive
1442material must immediately disconnect from
1447that site. The ability to connect with a
1455specific web site does not in itself imply
1463that permission is granted to visit that
1470site.
1471* * *
14746. Due Process
1477a. Any employee failing to comply with
1484this Management Directive may be subject to
1491disciplinary action as well as civil
1497liability or criminal charges.
15017. Searches and Seizures
1505a. Employees have limited privacy
1510expectation in the contents of their
1516personal files on the District Network. . .
1524At any time and without prior notice, the
1532District reserves the right to examine
1538electronic mail messages, files on personal
1544computers, web browser cache files, web
1550browser bookmarks, and other information
1555stored on or passing through District
1561computers.
1562b. Routine maintenance and monitoring of
1568the Network may lead to discovery that a
1576user has violated this Management Directive
1582or the law. An individual search in
1589collaboration with the employee's supervisor
1594or Employee Relations will be conducted if
1601there is a reasonable suspicion that a user
1609has violated the law or this Management
1616Directive.
161713. All employees are expected to be aware of and adhere
1628to Management Directive A-9. Each time a user logs on to a
1640District computer, a "pop-up" appears that includes a warning
1649against improper use. The pop-up says in pertinent part:
1658NOTICE TO USERS
1661This is an Orange County Public Schools
1668owned computer. It is for authorized use
1675only. You are responsible for all access
1682that occurs using your logon and
1688password. . . Unauthorized or improper use
1695of this system may result in disciplinary
1702action as specified in Management Directive
1708A-9 . . . as well as civil and/or criminal
1718penalties. [Site to Management Directive
1723A-9 is provided.]
172614. The log-on pop-up appeared on Respondent's screen each
1735time he logged on at school. Respondent was aware of Management
1746Directive A-9, but doesn't know if he ever read the entire five-
1758page directive in its entirety. He does, however, acknowledge
1767that he is bound by the terms of that directive.
177715. After Close found the seemingly incriminating document
1785on Respondent's computer, Administration conducted a full review
1793of Respondent's H drive and computer in its entirety. Numerous
1803personal files were found which, in the view of school
1813administration, violated Management Directive A-9. A partial
1820list of the questioned files and documents follows:
1828 Stories entitled, "Your Neighbor is
1834Watching You" and "Life Changes Quickly"
1840(about a male business executive's sexual
1846interest in his newly hired secretary),
1852and "Luvystory."
1854 Security reports for a job where
1861Respondent had worked part time.
1866 On-line business (money-making)
1870opportunities.
1871 Information about an on-line business
1877(www.Getestore.com).
1878 Shopping from internet retailers,
1883including www.Amazon.com,
1885www.Perfume.com, www.Walmart.com and
1888others.
1889 Digital pictures of scantily clad women
1896related to a proposed business venture by
1903Respondent.
1904 A social networking site called
1910www.blackmembervoices.com with
1912Respondent's profile, photo and contact
1917information.
1918 Numerous non-educational sites relating
1923to funny videos, court TV, vacation
1929sites, golf sites, etc.
1933 Personal correspondence written by
1938Respondent.
193916. It is clear Respondent used his school computer on
1949many occasions to at least visit suspect web sites, engage in
1960business and/or work on non-school-related documents. What is
1968less clear is the extent to which those sites or documents were
1980accessed during classroom periods.
198417. Petitioner's technology personnel were able to
1991identify all of the sites and documents existing on Respondent's
2001computer. An exhaustive list of each site, including when each
2011had been accessed, was provided at final hearing. The list
2021clearly shows that Respondent accessed sites or opened
2029questionable files during classroom periods, during Respondent's
2036planning period, and before and after school. The technology
2045people could not, however, ascertain how long each site or
2055document remained on Respondent's screen once it was opened.
206418. Respondent maintains that he only worked on documents
2073for brief periods of time and perhaps only accessed them to
2084transfer from a pen drive or diskette to his H drive without
2096working on them at all. He says that he did not open any
2109inappropriate documents in the presence of students. No
2117students, as far as he knows, ever accessed Respondent's
2126computer.
212719. It is clear that Respondent's school computer
2135contained documents and materials that violated Management
2142Directive A-9. It is clear those documents, materials and
2151questionable web sites were accessed numerous times. It is not
2161clear how much time Respondent spent on the documents, viewing
2171the sites, or engaging in personal business on the computer.
218120. "Willful neglect of duty" has been defined as a
2191constant and continuing intentional refusal to obey a direct
2200order, reasonable in nature, and given by and with proper
2210authority. See Fla. Admin. Code R. 6B-4.009(4). Respondent's
2218continued use of his school computer for personal reasons,
2227however brief each use might have been, constitutes willful
2236neglect of duty under this definition.
224221. By having objectionable and potentially harmful
2249information and documents on his computer, Respondent breached
2257his employment agreement. Respondent was not protecting
2264students from conditions harmful to their learning. Although no
2273students were known to actually see the material, its mere
2283existence was in violation of Respondent's obligations.
2290Further, by taking time out of his work day to engage in
2302personal business and other interests, Respondent has
2309subordinated his professional obligation to his students.
231622. Respondent's explanations about his use of the
2324computer bear some discussion. The explanations do not deny the
2334existence of the materials or access to web sites, but seek to
2346minimize the significance of the use (or misuse).
235423. As for the short stories on the computer, Respondent
2364says he was taking an on-line literature class and the stories
2375were part of his assignments. He would submit stories and they
2386would be evaluated by instructors. Respondent's intent was to
2395receive some sort of certification of completion from the class
2405and submit that to his employer (OCPS) as evidence that he was
2417attempting to enhance his education. Respondent never finished
2425the on-line course. 2
242924. As for use of the school computer, Respondent says (at
2440page 444 of the hearing Transcript), "So anytime I'd use those
2451things, I would--if I had some spare time, I'd pop it in and
2464work on it, and I'd save it on my H drive." This testimony
2477somewhat contradicts Respondent's claim that the documents were
2485only accessed when he was downloading them from a pen drive.
249625. The pictures of scantily clad women were explained by
2506Respondent as merely advertisements that had been part of a web
2517sites (Men's Health magazine) he had accessed during school
2526hours. He did not download the pictures to his H drive.
253726. Also appearing on the computer were some pictures
2546described as "modeling photos." Respondent says those were
2554pictures he accessed from a modeling site with the intent of
2565creating a DVD or PowerPoint presentation for use by the models
2576in marketing themselves. Respondent says he did not know any of
2587the models and that this proposed business never came to full
2598fruition. Respondent says he worked on that project using his
2608school computer, but during after-school hours.
261427. Respondent says that although he had documents and
2623information about his personal businesses on the school
2631computer, he never used the computer to order supplies for his
2642business. He admits ordering some Beanie Babies, but says those
2652were ordered as gifts for people, not as replacement goods for
2663his vending company business. Respondent did draft contracts on
2672his school computer, but says he never used them in conjunction
2683with his business.
268628. The security logs on Respondent's computer were done
2695for a friend. Respondent had worked as a part-time security
2705guard at an apartment complex. When he could no longer do so
2717because of the requirements of his teaching job, Respondent was
2727able to turn the job over to a friend. That friend could not
2740write well, so Respondent would do the friend's weekly logs for
2751him on the computer.
275529. In total, it is clear that Respondent did utilize his
2766school computer for personal matters and that some of the
2776personal matters were not appropriate for high school students
2785in his charge. The fact that no students saw the inappropriate
2796material--as far as anyone knows--does not minimize the
2804seriousness of Respondent's actions.
2808CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
281130. DOAH has jurisdiction over the parties and subject
2820matter of this case pursuant to Sections 120.569 and 120.57,
2830Florida Statutes (2008).
283331. Petitioner has the burden of establishing the facts of
2843the case by a preponderance of the evidence sufficient to
2853warrant discipline against Respondent, up to and including
2861dismissal. McNeill v. Pinellas County School Board , 678 So. 2d
2871476 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Dileo v. School Board of Dade County ,
2883569 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990).
289132. Section 1012.33, Florida Statutes (2007), which allows
2899District School Boards to dismiss professional service contract
2907teachers for just cause, provides as follows:
2914(1)(a) Each person employed as a member
2921of the instructional staff in any district
2928school system shall be properly certified
2934pursuant to s. 1012.56 or s. 1012.57 or
2942employed pursuant to s. 1012.39 and shall be
2950entitled to and shall receive a written
2957contract as specified in this section. All
2964such contracts, except continuing contracts
2969as specified in subsection (4), shall
2975contain provisions for dismissal during the
2981term of the contract only for just cause.
2989Just cause includes, but is not limited to,
2997the following instances, as defined by rule
3004of the State Board of Education: misconduct
3011in office, incompetency, gross
3015insubordination, willful neglect of duty, or
3021conviction of a crime involving moral
3027turpitude.
302833. Florida Administrative Code Rule 6B-4.009 addresses
3035the various criteria for suspending or dismissing a teacher:
30446B-4.009 Criteria for Suspension and
3049Dismissal.
3050The basis for charges upon which dismissal
3057action against instructional personnel may
3062be pursued are set forth in Section 231.36,
3070Florida Statutes. The basis for each of
3077such charges is hereby defined:
3082(1) Incompetency is defined as inability
3088or lack of fitness to discharge the required
3096duty as a result of inefficiency or
3103incapacity. Since incompetency is a
3108relative term, an authoritative decision in
3114an individual case may be made on the basis
3123of testimony by members of a panel of expert
3132witnesses appropriately appointed from the
3137teaching profession by the Commissioner of
3143Education. Such judgment shall be based on
3150a preponderance of evidence showing the
3156existence of one (1) or more of the
3164following:
3165(a) Inefficiency: (1) repeated failure
3170to perform duties prescribed by law (Section
3177231.09, Florida Statutes); (2) repeated
3182failure on the part of a teacher to
3190communicate with and relate to children in
3197the classroom, to such an extent that pupils
3205are deprived of minimum educational
3210experience; or (3) repeated failure on the
3217part of an administrator or supervisor to
3224communicate with and relate to teachers
3230under his or her supervision to such an
3238extent that the educational program for
3244which he or she is responsible is seriously
3252impaired.
3253(b) Incapacity: (1) lack of emotional
3259stability; (2) lack of adequate physical
3265ability; (3) lack of general educational
3271background; or (4) lack of adequate command
3278of his or her area of specialization.
3285(2) Immorality is defined as conduct that
3292is inconsistent with the standards of public
3299conscience and good morals. It is conduct
3306sufficiently notorious to bring the
3311individual concerned or the education
3316profession into public disgrace or
3321disrespect and impair the individuals
3326service in the community.
3330(3) Misconduct in office is defined as a
3338violation of the Code of Ethics of the
3346Education Profession as adopted in Rule
33526B-1.001, F.A.C., and the Principles of
3358Professional Conduct for the Education
3363Profession in Florida as adopted in Rule
33706B-1.006, F.A.C., which is so serious as to
3378impair the individuals effectiveness in the
3384school system.
3386(4) Gross insubordination or willful
3391neglect of duties is defined as a constant
3399or continuing intentional refusal to obey a
3406direct order, reasonable in nature, and
3412given by and with proper authority.
341834. It is clear that Respondent used his school computer
3428to view materials that were not intended to further the
3438education of students. Further, Respondent's computer contained
3445documents which had no relation whatsoever to Respondent's
3453teaching duties and responsibilities. Some of the information
3461stored on Respondent's school computer was inappropriate,
3468whether or not such information was disseminated to students or
3478other individuals.
348035. Petitioner has met its burden of proof by
3489establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that
3497Respondent is guilty of misconduct in office. Further, that
3506misconduct is in direct violation of an OCPS policy. However,
3516the extent of that misconduct and its impact on Respondent's
3526effectiveness as a teacher has not been sufficiently established
3535to warrant dismissal.
353836. Nonetheless, Respondent's conduct does warrant
3544sanctions and remedial education.
3548RECOMMENDATION
3549Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
3559Law, it is
3562RECOMMENDED that a final order be entered by the Orange
3572County School Board finding Respondent guilty of misconduct in
3581office and imposing the following sanctions: Uphold
3588Respondent's suspension to date; reinstate Respondent's
3594professional services contract commencing as soon as
3601practicable; and require Respondent to complete remedial
3608training concerning professionalism and use of school property.
3616DONE AND ENTERED this 19th day of December, 2008, in
3626Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.
3630R. BRUCE MCKIBBEN
3633Administrative Law Judge
3636Division of Administrative Hearings
3640The DeSoto Building
36431230 Apalachee Parkway
3646Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060
3649(850) 488-9675
3651Fax Filing (850) 921-6847
3655www.doah.state.fl.us
3656Filed with the Clerk of the
3662Division of Administrative Hearings
3666this 19th day of December, 2008.
3672ENDNOTES
36731/ Although both parties brought out the racial makeup of the
3684schools in testimony, there was no plausible explanation as to
3694why that fact was relevant to the instant case.
37032/ The "Neighbor" story is replete with grammatical errors,
3712misspellings, fractured sentences and disjointed paragraphs. It
3719was, in essence, not indicative of writing done by a
3729professional with Respondent's educational background. However,
3735Respondent maintains that it was his work, and there is nothing
3746to refute that testimony.
3750COPIES FURNISHED :
3753Dr. Eric J. Smith
3757Commissioner of Education
3760Department of Education
3763Turlington Building, Suite 1514
3767325 West Gaines Street
3771Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400
3774Ronald (Ron) Blocker, Superintendent
3778Orange County School Board
3782445 West Amelia Street
3786Orlando, Florida 32801-0271
3789Deborah K. Kearney, General Counsel
3794Department of Education
3797Turlington Building, Suite 1244
3801325 West Gaines Street
3805Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0400
3808Tobe M. Lev, Esquire
3812Egan, Lev & Siwica, P.A.
3817231 East Colonial Drive
3821Orlando, Florida 32801
3824Brian F. Moes, Esquire
3828Orange County School Board
3832445 West Amelia Street
3836Post Office Box 271
3840Orlando, Florida 32802-1129
3843NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS
3849All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within
385915 days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions
3870to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that
3881will issue the Final Order in this case.
- Date
- Proceedings
- PDF:
- Date: 01/07/2009
- Proceedings: Letter to parties of record from Judge Mckibben enclosing Petitioner`s Exhibit 23.
- PDF:
- Date: 12/29/2008
- Proceedings: Letter to Judge McKibben from B. Moes enclosing copy of Exhibit No. 23 (exhibit not available for viewing) filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 12/19/2008
- Proceedings: Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
- PDF:
- Date: 12/04/2008
- Proceedings: Petitioner`s Objection to Respondent`s Motion to File with DOAH Overnighted Brief with Color Graphs filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 12/02/2008
- Proceedings: Respondent`s Motion to File with DOAH Overnighted Brief with Color Graphs filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 11/17/2008
- Proceedings: Order Granting Extension of Time (proposed recommended orders to be filed by December 1, 2008).
- Date: 11/03/2008
- Proceedings: Transcript (Volumes 1-3) filed.
- Date: 08/28/2008
- Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
- PDF:
- Date: 08/25/2008
- Proceedings: Petitioner`s and Respondent`s (Amended) Joint Pre-hearing Stipulation filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 08/25/2008
- Proceedings: Petitioner`s and Respondent`s Joint Pre-hearing Stipulation filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 08/06/2008
- Proceedings: Notice of Service of Petitioner`s Supplemental Answers to Respondent`s Third Interrogatories filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 08/06/2008
- Proceedings: Petitioner`s Response to Respondent`s Amended Third Request to Produce filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 08/01/2008
- Proceedings: Notice to Take Continued Depositions of Eric Close and Andrew Huffman filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 08/01/2008
- Proceedings: Notice to Take Deposition of Denise Dickenson, Union Representatives filed.
- Date: 07/18/2008
- Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Pre-Hearing Conference Held.
- PDF:
- Date: 07/11/2008
- Proceedings: Notice of Service of Petitioner`s Answers to Respondent`s Third Interrogatories filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 06/13/2008
- Proceedings: Amended Notice of Hearing (hearing set for August 27 and 28, 2008; 9:30 a.m.; Orlando, FL; amended as to date and type of hearing).
- PDF:
- Date: 06/13/2008
- Proceedings: Objections to Respondent`s Request to Produce Served Under Certified Date May 20, 2008 filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 06/11/2008
- Proceedings: Respondent`s Amended Third Request for Production of Documents filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 06/11/2008
- Proceedings: Respondent`s Answers to Petitioner`s First Set of Interrogatories filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 06/10/2008
- Proceedings: Order Granting Continuance and Re-scheduling Hearing by Video Teleconference (hearing set for August 25, 2008; 9:00 a.m.; Orlando and Tallahassee, FL).
- PDF:
- Date: 05/05/2008
- Proceedings: Notice of Service of Petitioner`s Answers to Respondent`s Interrogatories filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 04/30/2008
- Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition of DeMiki Joiner, Assistant Principal filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 04/30/2008
- Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition of Michael Byrne, Assistant Principal filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 04/30/2008
- Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition of Eric Close, Technical Support filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 04/30/2008
- Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition of Andrew Huffman, Systems Engineer filed.
Case Information
- Judge:
- R. BRUCE MCKIBBEN
- Date Filed:
- 03/31/2008
- Date Assignment:
- 06/12/2008
- Last Docket Entry:
- 01/07/2009
- Location:
- Orlando, Florida
- District:
- Middle
- Agency:
- County School Boards
- Suffix:
- TTS
Counsels
-
Tobe M. Lev, Esquire
Address of Record -
Brian F Moes, Esquire
Address of Record -
Brian F. Moes, Esquire
Address of Record