103 So. 3d 1237
La. Ct. App.2012Background
- Irchirl, a guidance counselor at Natchitoches Central High School, was terminated by the Natchitoches Parish School Board after a nine-session tenure hearing in 2009.
- The Board charged him with ten willful neglect of duty counts; six charges were ultimately sustained (4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10).
- Charge 4 concerned failure to coordinate accurate grade records and improper timing/posting of grades and GPAs.
- Irchirl received written charges June 11, 2009, and the hearing continued through September 30, 2009, with counsel and extensive testimony.
- The trial court affirmed the Board’s termination, finding substantial evidence to support the six sustained charges.
- Irchirl appealed, arguing TTL formalities were not satisfied and that the Board’s findings lacked substantial evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| TTL compliance | Irchirl argued the Board failed to meet TTL formalities. | Board contends it complied with TTL and afforded due process. | Board complied with TTL formalities. |
| Substantial evidence | Irchirl contends findings were not supported by substantial evidence. | Board asserts the evidence supports willful neglect of duty. | There is substantial evidence supporting Charge 4; termination affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wise v. Bossier Parish School Bd., 851 So.2d 1090 (La. 2003) (judicial review limited to TTL compliance; substantial evidence required)
- Serignet v. Livingston Parish School Bd., 282 So.2d 761 (La.App. 1 Cir.1973) (detailed reasons must accompany dismissal notice)
- Arriola v. Orleans Parish Sch. Bd., 809 So.2d 932 (La.2002) (deference to school board findings; due process considerations)
- Rubin v. Lafayette Parish Sch. Bd., 649 So.2d 1003 (La.App. 3 Cir.1994) (due process flexible; substantial evidence standard)
- Johns v. Jefferson Davis Parish School Bd., 154 So.2d 581 (La.App. 3 Cir.1963) (notice and hearing contemplated by TTL; reasonable specificity)
- Wilson v. City of New Orleans, 479 So.2d 891 (La.1985) (due process requirements framed by circumstance)