Shawn Durham v. Town of Galveston, Indiana (mem. dec.)
09A04-1706-MI-1322
| Ind. Ct. App. | Nov 6, 2017Background
- Shawn Durham was appointed Town Marshal of Galveston and served at the pleasure of the five-member Town Board, which also functions as the safety board.
- The Board initially voted 3-2 to terminate Durham, then rescinded that termination and issued nine written disciplinary charges, triggering the IC 36-8 disciplinary removal procedure.
- Two board members (Hart and Jackson) were both named as witnesses in multiple charges; Durham moved to recuse them from voting but the Board denied the motion.
- At the August 24, 2016 disciplinary hearing Hart and Jackson testified and then participated in the Board’s deliberations; the Board found Durham guilty on eight of nine counts and terminated him by a 3-2 vote.
- Durham sought judicial review claiming the Board’s procedure violated due process because Hart and Jackson acted as both material witnesses and decisionmakers; the trial court affirmed the Board.
- On appeal, the Court of Appeals considered only the due process claim and affirmed, concluding Durham failed to show actual bias such that recusal was required.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether permitting board members who testified to vote violated due process | Durham: dual role of witnesses and adjudicators created impermissible bias/appearance of partiality and denied a fair hearing | Town: Hart and Jackson were witnesses, not prosecutors; their testimony was necessary and presence as voters did not prove bias | Held: No due process violation—no showing of actual bias; prior involvement as witnesses does not automatically disqualify members |
Key Cases Cited
- Rynerson v. City of Franklin, 669 N.E.2d 964 (Ind. 1996) (neutral decisionmaker requirement and presumption of adjudicator integrity)
- City of Mishawaka v. Stewart, 310 N.E.2d 65 (Ind. 1974) (appearance of bias where prosecutor chaired adjudicatory body invalidates proceedings)
- Withrow v. Larkin, 421 U.S. 35 (1975) (presumption that adjudicators are unbiased; test for combination of investigative and adjudicative roles)