Tripcony v. Arkansas School for the Deaf
2012 Ark. 188
| Ark. | 2012Background
- Tripcony sued to obtain judicial review of the School’s termination and SEGAP’s upholding of the RIF.
- SEGAP found the RIF complied with the Statewide Workforce Reduction Policy and that alternatives were not viable.
- The circuit court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and immune defenses.
- Tripcony asserted the termination was administrative adjudication and thus subject to review under the APA.
- The court held that termination of state employees is administrative, not adjudicatory, and not subject to APA review.
- The appeal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and immunity defenses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject-matter jurisdiction to review SEGAP | Tripcony contends circuit court can review SEGAP. | School et al. argue lack of jurisdiction per House. | Lacks subject-matter jurisdiction; appeal dismissed. |
| Public policy exception to at-will employment | Reduction Policy public policy justifies wrongful-termination claim. | Policy is procedural and not public policy. | No public-policy exception; at-will employment stands. |
| Applicability of Prentis v. Atlantic Coast Line Co. | Prentis supports adjudicatory nature of termination decisions. | Prentis is inapplicable to APA review of state-employee terminations. | Prentis not controlling; termination is administrative. |
Key Cases Cited
- Arkansas Livestock & Poultry Comm’n v. House, 276 Ark. 326, 634 S.W.2d 388 (1982) (discharge of an employee is not an APA adjudication; termination is administrative)
- Koonee v. Mitchell, 841 Ark. 716, 19 S.W.3d 608 (2000) (subject-matter jurisdiction assessed from pleadings)
- Union Pac. R.R. Co. v. State ex rel. Faulkner County, 316 Ark. 609, 873 S.W.2d 805 (1994) (definition of subject-matter jurisdiction; authority to hear a type of case)
- Edwards v. Edwards, 2009 Ark. 580, 357 S.W.3d 445 (2009) (de novo review when statutory interpretation is involved)
- Viswanathan v. Mississippi Cnty. Cmty. Coll. Bd. of Trustees, 318 Ark. 810, 887 S.W.2d 531 (1994) (APA review limits relative to state educational institutions)
- Sterling Drug, Inc. v. Oxford, 294 Ark. 239, 743 S.W.2d 380 (1988) (public policy exception to at-will employment requires strong policy grounds)
- Northport Health Servs., Inc. v. Owens, 356 Ark. 630, 158 S.W.3d 164 (2004) (public policy concerns arising in wrongful termination contexts)
- Island v. Buena Vista Resort, 352 Ark. 548, 103 S.W.3d 671 (2003) (public-policy considerations in wrongful-termination claims)
- Prentis v. Atlantic Coast Line Co., 211 U.S. 210 (1908) (distinction between judicial inquiries and legislation; not APA-related)