Ball v. Board of Education of the City of Chicago
994 N.E.2d 999
Ill. App. Ct.2013Background
- Vera Ball, a tenured special-education teacher at Paul Revere Elementary (CPS), was charged and later dismissed for conduct related to inadequate supervision on May 26, 2009, and for making false statements to investigators.
- On that day, several seventh- and eighth-grade students left Ball’s classroom unescorted at times; video showed students unsupervised during two periods (mid-morning and mid-afternoon) when sexual activity among students occurred.
- Ball was recorded attempting to register for professional development during a 30–45 minute span when students were idle in Room 200; she later denied responsibility and told investigators students had been escorted.
- A hearing officer found Ball negligent and dishonest but recommended reinstatement with a warning (concluding some lapses were remediable).
- The Chicago Board of Education rejected parts of that recommendation, found Ball’s negligence, dishonesty, and indifference irremediable per section 34-85 of the School Code, and terminated her employment.
- The circuit court affirmed the Board; the appellate court reviewed the Board’s decision and affirmed dismissal, holding Ball’s conduct was immoral/negligent and irremediable per se.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Ball negligently breached supervision duties leading to student sexual activity | Ball challenged negligence finding (waived below) and argued lack of proof connecting her conduct to student harm | Board argued Ball abandoned duties, failed to escort students, and lied to investigators, creating opportunity for misconduct | Affirmed: Board’s factual findings re negligence supported by evidence and not against manifest weight |
| Whether Ball’s false statements warranted termination as immoral conduct | Ball argued false statements did not amount to immoral conduct requiring dismissal and no showing of personal gain or intent to mislead | Board argued falsehoods showed dishonesty/indifference and were tied to avoiding responsibility for negligent acts | Affirmed: Dishonesty supported finding of immoral conduct; dismissal proper under §34‑85 |
| Whether the Board’s termination was arbitrary and capricious | Ball argued other staff (assistant or substitute) were responsible and the Board ignored evidence | Board maintained Ball had primary responsibility and provided reasoned findings citing video and testimony | Affirmed: Board’s decision was reasoned, cited evidence, and not arbitrary or capricious |
| Whether dismissal required proof of actual physical/psychological injury to students | Ball contended Board failed to prove injury | Board relied on statute and precedent that cruel/immoral/negligent conduct is irremediable per se without proof of harm | Affirmed: Under §34‑85 and precedent, proof of specific harm not required for dismissal |
Key Cases Cited
- Younge v. Board of Education of the City of Chicago, 338 Ill. App. 3d 522 (2003) (establishes that cruel, immoral, negligent, or criminal conduct by teacher is irremediable per se and supports dismissal without progressive discipline)
- Ahmad v. Board of Education of the City of Chicago, 365 Ill. App. 3d 155 (2006) (upholds dismissal where teacher’s intentional dishonesty and concealment constituted immoral conduct supporting termination)
- Hearne v. Chicago School Reform Board of Trustees of the Board of Education for the City of Chicago, 322 Ill. App. 3d 467 (2001) (discusses procedural/due-process limits on agency decisionmaking and when appellate deference is appropriate)