08-001596TTS Orange County School Board vs. James Deshay
 Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Friday, December 19, 2008.


View Dockets  
Summary: Petitioner met burden to prove misconduct by Respondent, but not to warrant dismissal as a sanction.

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 individual’s

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 individual’s 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.

Select the PDF icon to view the document.
PDF
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
PDF:
Date: 12/19/2008
Proceedings: Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
PDF:
Date: 12/19/2008
Proceedings: Recommended Order (hearing held August 28, 2008). CASE CLOSED.
PDF:
Date: 12/08/2008
Proceedings: Order Concerning Color Graphs in PRO.
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: Deshay`s Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/02/2008
Proceedings: (Petitioner`s) Proposed Recommended Final Order 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).
PDF:
Date: 11/14/2008
Proceedings: Motion to Extend Date for Filing Recommended Orders filed.
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: 08/21/2008
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Exhibit List and Witness List 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: 08/05/2008
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition of Deborah Brown 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: 07/11/2008
Proceedings: Motion for Case Management Conference filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/20/2008
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition of Shonda Von Schriltz filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/20/2008
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition of Gina Dole filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/20/2008
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition of Lynn DeRostaing filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/20/2008
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition of Cathy Pope filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/20/2008
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition of Barbara Jenkins filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/20/2008
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition of Susan Gluckman filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/20/2008
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition of Heather Hilton filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/20/2008
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition of Pamela Waugh 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: Notice of Transfer.
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: Agreed Motion for Two Day Hearing filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/11/2008
Proceedings: Request for Subpoenas 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: 06/10/2008
Proceedings: Respondent`s Third Set of Interrogatories filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/10/2008
Proceedings: Respondent`s Third Request for Production of Documents filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/04/2008
Proceedings: Respondent`s Motion to Continue Hearing filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/20/2008
Proceedings: Respondent`s Second Set of Interrogatories filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/20/2008
Proceedings: Respondent`s Second Request for Production of Documents filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/05/2008
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Response to Respondent`s Request to Produce filed.
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 Principal William Gordon 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.
PDF:
Date: 04/29/2008
Proceedings: Amended Notice of Taking Deposition of James De Shay filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/29/2008
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Interrogatories filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/18/2008
Proceedings: Notice of Take Deposition of James De Shay filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/08/2008
Proceedings: Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
PDF:
Date: 04/08/2008
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing by Video Teleconference (hearing set for June 25, 2008; 9:00 a.m.; Orlando and Tallahassee, FL).
PDF:
Date: 04/04/2008
Proceedings: Respondent`s First Set of Interrogatories filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/04/2008
Proceedings: Respondent`s First Request for Production of Documents filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/03/2008
Proceedings: Joint Response to Initial Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/31/2008
Proceedings: Administrative Complaint filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/31/2008
Proceedings: Request for Administrative Hearing filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/31/2008
Proceedings: Agency referral filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/31/2008
Proceedings: Initial Order.

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

Related DOAH Cases(s) (1):

Related Florida Statute(s) (6):

Related Florida Rule(s) (3):