Shaffer v. City of Muskogee Merit System Board
2016 OK CIV APP 64
| Okla. Civ. App. | 2016Background
- Jack Shaffer, a City of Muskogee employee, punched co-worker Stanley Goodman during a workplace altercation; Goodman denied provoking or touching Shaffer. Witnesses heard the argument and saw the two emerge from a small office; others separated them.
- The City gave Shaffer pre-termination notice alleging multiple rule violations, including fighting during working hours, and terminated him effective December 23, 2013.
- Shaffer appealed to the City Merit System Board; after a hearing the Board voted 2–1 to uphold the termination.
- Shaffer petitioned for district court review; the City moved to dismiss claiming a City Code provision made the Board's decisions "not subject to appeal to any court." The district court denied the motion and affirmed the Board, finding no error of law and that the findings were supported by evidence.
- On appeal to the Court of Civil Appeals Shaffer argued (1) the district court lacked jurisdiction because the City ordinance barred judicial review, (2) the termination lacked just cause and was unsupported by clear weight of evidence because he acted in self-defense, and (3) he lacked notice that a harassment policy was the basis for termination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Shaffer) | Defendant's Argument (City) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| District court jurisdiction to review Merit Board decision | City ordinance purports to make Board decisions "not subject to appeal to any court," so no district-court jurisdiction | Board decisions are final under City Code but do not abrogate state statutory right to judicial review; charter controls and does not bar appeals | The charter does not abrogate §951 rights; the city ordinance conflicting with the charter is invalid; district court had jurisdiction to review the Board. |
| Whether termination was supported by just cause (fighting) | Shaffer acted in self-defense; evidence shows he was not the aggressor so termination lacked just cause | City: Shaffer admitted punching, wrestling, and headlocking Goodman; fighting at work violates rules and supports termination | Court: Merit Board’s factual findings are supported by the clear weight of the evidence; termination for fighting was not contrary to law or against the clear weight of evidence. |
| Whether termination was based on sexual/harassment policy without notice | Shaffer contends City relied on harassment policy and he lacked notice | City actually relied on work rules (e.g., fighting) and timely notified Shaffer of the reasons for termination | Court: No reversible error — City sought termination for fighting; harassment-policy argument lacked merit. |
| Adequacy of Merit Board findings for judicial review | Shaffer: Board failed to make sufficient findings of fact to support the decision | City: Board reduced its decision to writing and provided a factual summary; only ultimate facts/conclusions are necessary for review | Court: Board’s written 2–1 decision and factual summary were sufficient for district-court review. |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Muskogee v. Grayson, 818 P.2d 491 (Okla. 1991) (standard of review: Board findings must be supported by clear weight of evidence)
- In re White, 355 P.2d 404 (Okla. 1960) (distinguishes charter language that preserves right of appeal to courts)
- Edwards v. City of Sallisaw, 339 P.3d 870 (Okla. 2014) (discusses charter supremacy over local ordinances and home-rule scope)
- Civil Service Comm’n of City of Tulsa v. Gresham, 653 P.2d 920 (Okla. 1982) (ultimate facts and conclusions suffice for judicial review of commission decisions)