Terry Christiansen v. Iowa Board of Educational Examiners
831 N.W.2d 179
| Iowa | 2013Background
- Christiansen, a middle school teacher and coach, involved in a bus altercation with a 14-year-old student, M.K., on Sept. 19, 2008.
- The Iowa Board of Educational Examiners issued charges on Feb. 5, 2009 alleging student abuse under 282 IAC 25.3(1)(e).
- ALJ recommended a ninety-day suspension and permanent revocation of endorsements; Board adopted most findings, striking a paragraph about prior discipline.
- Both sides timely applied for rehearing; the Board denied Christiansen’s rehearing and granted the State’s rehearing on Jan. 13–25, 2010 actions.
- Christiansen filed a petition for judicial review in district court on Jan. 13, 2010, arguing premature filing; the State argued lack of finality due to pending rehearing.
- The district court ultimately held jurisdiction and, after later developments, in Aug. 2011 the district court upheld the Board; the Court of Appeals decision was vacated.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| When must a petition for judicial review be filed with multiple rehearings? | Christiansen argues timely filing within 30 days of his denial. | State asserts final decision on rehearing governs deadline. | Deadline tied to final decision on last pending rehearing. |
| Is the district court’s jurisdiction triggered when there is a pending rehearing on another party’s application? | The district court had jurisdiction once Christiansen’s own rehearing was denied. | Final agency action remained unsettled due to pending State rehearing. | District court had jurisdiction after final agency action on last rehearing. |
| Can an amended petition relate back to a timely filing despite initial premature petition? | Amendment relates back to the original petition date. | Amendment must conform to timely deadline; otherwise untimely. | Amended petition relating back was timely; jurisdiction proper. |
| May prior discipline evidence be considered for sanctions and does 280.21(2) safe harbor apply? | Safe harbor under 280.21(2) shields from liability and restricts use of prior discipline. | Prior discipline relevant to sanction; safe harbor not applicable here. | Prior discipline admissible for sanction; safe harbor not applicable to this conduct. |
Key Cases Cited
- Cooper v. Kirkwood Community College, 782 N.W.2d 160 (Iowa Ct. App. 2010) (dueling rehearings not directly addressed by Cooper; supports wait-for-final-decision logic)
- Fee v. Emp’t Appeal Bd., 463 N.W.2d 20 (Iowa 1990) (extension of deadline when a rehearing is granted)
- McCormick v. N. Star Foods, Inc., 533 N.W.2d 196 (Iowa 1995) (petition for judicial review deprives agency of jurisdiction; exhaustion principles)
- Houck v. Iowa Bd. of Pharmacy Exam’rs, 752 N.W.2d 14 (Iowa 2008) (standard of review for agency findings; deference to agency credibility)
- Am. Eyecare v. Dep’t of Human Servs., 770 N.W.2d 832 (Iowa 2009) (application of IAPA standards to agency action; substantial evidence review)