Fitzgiven v. Dorey
2013 Ark. 346
| Ark. | 2013Background
- Appellants (PACT, PASS, Evans class, and Clevenger class) challenged ADE’s actions supervising PCSSD after fiscal distress findings.
- ADE dissolved PCSSD’s board, replaced its superintendent, and required binding staffing/fiscal recommendations under Ark. Code Ann. § 6-20-1908(f).
- PCSSD allegedly withdrew recognition of PACT and PASS, terminated PNAs, and implemented new personnel policies effective July 1, 2012.
- Plaintiffs claimed ADE’s actions (binding recommendations, derecognition, and policy changes) were ultra vires, arbitrary, capricious, or in bad faith, involving nonfiscal matters.
- Plaintiffs sought declarations, injunctions, and assertions under APA, ATFDA, PSEFHA, and other claims, arguing ADE exceeded authority.
- The circuit court dismissed all four cases, holding sovereign immunity barred suits against ADE and Kimbrell; appeals followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sovereign-immunity applicability | Suits seek ultra vires, bad-faith actions by ADE exceeding authority. | Actions were within ADE’s broad fiscal-distress authority and are barred by sovereign immunity. | Suits barred by sovereign immunity; no valid exception shown. |
| ADE authority to terminate PNAs and derecognize bargaining units | ADE exceeded authority by addressing nonfiscal policies. | Statutes authorize broad actions to remove fiscal-distress criteria, including nonfiscal policy changes. | ADE acted within statutory authority; no ultra vires finding. |
| APA claims viability against ADE in this posture | APA provides judicial review of agency actions. | APA review is limited to adjudications; complaints did not plead such an adjudication. | APA claims not reviewable here; failure to obtain ruling on APA argument precludes review. |
| Whether Appellants alleged sufficient facts to overcome immunity | Complaint shows ADE acted ultra vires and in bad faith. | Facts do not establish ultra vires or bad-faith actions; statute broad and applicable. | Appellants failed to plead sufficient facts to show ultra vires or bad faith; immunity affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- LandsnPulaski, LLC v. Arkansas Dep’t of Correction, 372 Ark. 40, 269 S.W.3d 793 (2007) (sovereign immunity and jurisdictional inquiry from pleadings)
- McLane Southern, Inc. v. Arkansas Tobacco Control Bd., 2010 Ark. 498, 375 S.W.3d 628 (2010) (ultra vires and authority limits for agency actions)
- Solomon v. Valco, Inc., 288 Ark. 106, 702 S.W.2d 6 (1986) (definition of ultra vires and agency powers)
- Primerica Life Ins. Co. v. Watson, 362 Ark. 54, 207 S.W.3d 443 (2004) (read statutes as written; avoid implying missing limits)
- Arkansas Dep’t of Environmental Quality v. Oil Producers of Arkansas, 2009 Ark. 297, 318 S.W.3d 570 (2009) (agency may be enjoined for ultra vires, arbitrary, or bad-faith actions)