Monongalia County Board of Education v. American Federation of Teachers—West Virginia
238 W. Va. 146
| W. Va. | 2016Background
- Monongalia County BOE (MCBOE) contracted with RESA VII for part‑time "interventionists" (certified individuals who provide small‑group/individual reading and math tutoring) to serve Title I and other schools; RESA‑hired interventionists are employees of the State Board.
- Interventionists work limited hours, are paid hourly without benefits, do not perform classroom teacher duties like planning, grading, or parent conferences, but are required to hold teacher certification.
- The American Federation of Teachers–WV (AFT) sued in Monongalia Circuit Court seeking a declaration and injunction that interventionists are statutory "classroom teachers" and thus must be directly employed (and contracted) by county boards under W. Va. Code § 18A provisions.
- The circuit court granted summary judgment for AFT, holding interventionists fit the statutory definition of "classroom teacher," and enjoined MCBOE from contracting with RESA VII for those services.
- MCBOE appealed to the West Virginia Supreme Court, which considered definitions of "teacher/classroom teacher," the statutory/residential scheme creating RESAs, State Board rules authorizing RESAs to employ staff and contract with counties, and competing statutory/regulatory provisions.
- The Supreme Court reversed: it held interventionists are not within the statutory definition of "classroom teacher" for hiring‑requirement purposes and that county boards may contract with RESAs for interventionist services under RESA statutes and State Board rules.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (AFT) | Defendant's Argument (MCBOE) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether interventionists meet the statutory definition of "classroom teacher" | Interventionists provide direct instruction and spend most of their time doing so, so they fall within W. Va. Code § 18A‑1‑1(c)(1) and must be classed as classroom teachers | Interventionists perform limited, supplemental/tutoring tasks distinct from classroom teacher duties; the classroom‑teacher definition should not be read to cover RESA interventionists | Court held interventionists are not intended to be "classroom teachers" for that statute — the classroom‑teacher definition does not encompass interventionists who provide targeted, limited services |
| Whether county boards may contract with RESAs to obtain interventionist services | If interventionists must be county‑hired teachers, contracting with RESA is improper | RESA statutory scheme and State Board rules expressly authorize RESAs to employ staff (including interventionists), develop strategic plans approved by the State Board, receive county/Title I funds, and contract with county boards to provide services | Court held county boards may contract with RESAs to provide interventionist services under 126 W. Va. C.S.R. §§ 72‑2.5 and 72‑3.13 and the RESA statutory framework |
Key Cases Cited
- Myers v. Barte, 167 W. Va. 194, 279 S.E.2d 406 (W. Va. 1981) (mandamus elements and standard)
- Harrison Cty. Comm’n v. Harrison Cty. Assessor, 222 W. Va. 25, 658 S.E.2d 555 (W. Va. 2008) (mandamus reviewed de novo)
- Painter v. Peavy, 192 W. Va. 189, 451 S.E.2d 755 (W. Va. 1994) (summary judgment reviewed de novo)
- Stanley v. Dep’t of Tax & Revenue, 217 W. Va. 65, 614 S.E.2d 712 (W. Va. 2005) (last‑in‑time statutory interpretation among in pari materia statutes)
- Carvey v. West Virginia State Bd. of Educ., 206 W. Va. 720, 527 S.E.2d 831 (W. Va. 1999) (specific statute controls over general statute)
- Teets v. Miller, 237 W. Va. 473, 788 S.E.2d 1 (W. Va. 2016) (statutory construction principles reiterated)