Robinson v. Morrill Cty. Sch. Dist. #63 and Morrill Cty. Bd. of Educ.

Summary

The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the district court's decision upholding a school board's cancellation of a certificated employee's employment contract. The court held that notice was proper, the school board could retain counsel to conduct and oversee the hearing, and the employee failed to establish that the decisionmaker was biased or that the evidence was insufficient. The opinion also addresses due process and the standards for incompetency, neglect of duty, unprofessional conduct, and insubordination under Nebraska law.

Holdings

1. The school board provided reasonable advance publicized notice of the hearing by a method it had regularly used and designated, and the failure to record the particular notice method in the meeting minutes did not invalidate otherwise adequate notice.
2. The school board properly retained an attorney to conduct and oversee the hearing, rule on objections, and receive evidence, because the attorney did not act as the statutory fact-finding hearing officer.
3. Robinson failed to establish that the school board was biased or that his procedural due process rights were violated.
4. A school board may consider all relevant conduct, including conduct occurring during a prior contract period, when determining whether to cancel a current employment contract.
5. Sufficient evidence as a matter of law supported the school board's findings of incompetency, neglect of duty, unprofessional conduct, and insubordination under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 79-827.
6. Robinson's challenge to his paid suspension was not preserved because he did not assign error to the suspension in his petition in error before the district court.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the school board provided legally sufficient public and actual notice of the contract-cancellation hearing.
2. Whether the school board's use of an attorney to preside over and assist with the hearing was authorized and proper.
3. Whether Robinson established that the school board was not an impartial decisionmaker in violation of procedural due process.
4. Whether evidence of Robinson's conduct during a prior contract period was relevant and admissible to support cancellation of his current contract.
5. Whether sufficient evidence supported findings of incompetency, neglect of duty, unprofessional conduct, and insubordination under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 79-827.
6. Whether Robinson's challenge to his paid suspension was preserved for appellate review.

Disposition

affirmed