Skip to main content

Rogelynn Emory v. Memphis City Schools Board of Education, Now Known As Shelby County Board Of Education

Tenn.January 13, 2017No. W2014-01293-SC-R11-CV
Defendant WinMemphis City Schools Board of Education, Now Known As Shelby County Board Of Education
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Justice Holly Kirby
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
Appeal to Tennessee Supreme Court from Court of Appeals decision; trial court's termination decision affirmed, partial back pay award reversed

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The Supreme Court of Tennessee affirmed the trial court's upholding of the school board's termination of a tenured teacher for unsatisfactory job performance, reversing the Court of Appeals' award of partial back pay and finding the timeliness issue was not properly raised before the board.

Excerpt

This case arises out of the termination of a tenured teacher. After a three-day hearing, the school board concluded that there was ample evidence of the teacher's unsatisfactory job performance, so it terminated her employment. In the trial court review of the school board's decision, the teacher argued that she should be reinstated with back pay because her school board hearing occurred well beyond the thirty-day period set forth in the Teachers' Tenure Act. The trial court affirmed the termination and the teacher appealed. The Court of Appeals declined to reinstate the teacher based on the untimeliness of the school board hearing but it awarded her partial back pay. On appeal, we first clarify the standard of judicial review for the termination of a tenured teacher under the Tenure Act. Second, we reverse the Court of Appeals' award of partial back pay to the teacher because the relief ordered is without basis in the Tenure Act. Finally, because the teacher failed to raise to the school board any objection as to the timeliness of her hearing, we hold that the issue is not properly before this Court. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's decision to uphold the termination of the teacher's employment.

What This Ruling Means

**Teacher's Wrongful Termination Case Against School Board** This case involved Rogelynn Emory, a tenured teacher who was fired by the Memphis City Schools Board of Education (now Shelby County Board of Education) for poor job performance. After a three-day hearing, the school board found sufficient evidence of unsatisfactory work and terminated her employment. Emory challenged her firing in court, arguing she should get her job back with back pay because the school board's hearing happened more than 30 days after it should have under the Teachers' Tenure Act. A lower court had awarded her some back pay, but the school board appealed. The Tennessee Supreme Court sided with the school board. The court ruled that Emory's termination was valid because there was adequate evidence of poor performance. More importantly, the court found that Emory had not properly raised the timing issue during her original hearing with the school board, so she couldn't use it as grounds for getting her job back later. **What this means for workers:** Even tenured employees can be fired for poor performance if employers follow proper procedures and document problems adequately. Workers must raise procedural objections at the right time during internal hearings, or they may lose the right to use those arguments in court later.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Similar Rulings

Mendez
U.S. Supreme CourtJan 2013
Dismissed
Danner
Conn. App. Ct.Oct 2021

The plaintiff filed an affidavit of illegal discriminatory practice with the defendant Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, alleging that the defendant A Co. wrongfully terminated her employment. Follow- ing an assignment of the matter to the commission's Office of Public Hearings, a human rights referee granted A Co.'s motion for summary judgment, finding that there was no genuine issue of material fact. The plaintiff and the commission separately appealed the referee's decision granting the motion for summary judgment to the Superior Court. The plaintiff claimed that genuine issues of material fact existed. The trial court consolidated the appeals, sustained the consolidated appeal and remanded the matter for a trial before the Office of Public Hearings, concluding that the referee improperly rendered summary judgment because A Co. did not meet its burden of establishing that there were no genuine issues of material fact. On A Co.'s appeal to this court, held that the trial court properly sustained the consolidated appeal and remanded the matter for a hearing: the court properly considered the plaintiff's affidavit as competent evidence in opposition to A Co.'s motion for summary judgment as the plaintiff's affidavit of discriminatory prac- tice was sworn and was properly considered pursuant to the applicable rule of practice (§ 17-49); moreover, the court properly conducted a plenary review of the record in considering whether genuine issues of material fact existed, as the deferential standard used to review administrative fact-finding did not extend to the determination of whether genuine issues of material fact existed in the summary judgment context; furthermore, the court did not err in considering whether genu- ine issues of material fact existed, as the record contained contradictory information, including a sworn statement by an employee of A Co. that the plaintiff's job duties required her to be physically present at the workplace and the plaint

Remanded
Harbeck
N.D. Ill.Mar 2019
Defendant Win
Thomas
Ohio Ct. App.Oct 2018

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in overruling Appellant's motion to amend her complaint, to include facts regarding her PTSD diagnosis and claims of racial and disability discrimination, eight months after she filed her administrative appeal from the termination of her teaching contract. The trial court did not consider Appellant's prior discipline at another school when determining that she was subject to termination, and Appellant was not denied due process. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that Appellant's failure to enter third quarter final grades was good and just cause for termination. Judgment affirmed.

Defendant Win
Derinda Carr v. Windham Professionals, Inc.
Tenn.Apr 2022

Appellant Derinda Carr challenges the trial court's finding her neck injury did not arise primarily "out of and in the course and scope of' her employment. The appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel for a hearing and a report of findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 51. We agree with the trial court and affirm the judgment.

Defendant Win

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.