CEDRIC J. MITCHELL, APPELLANT,
v.
THE SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A Florida teacher appeals his termination for obtaining fraudulent academic credits from Eastern Oklahoma State College that he used to gain teacher certification. The appellate court affirms the School Board's termination, rejecting the teacher's argument that the Board must establish disciplinary guidelines to ensure consistency in disciplinary decisions.
The court affirmed Mitchell's termination, holding that there is no statutory requirement for the School Board to promulgate disciplinary guidelines, and that the termination was authorized by statute because Mitchell's conduct fell within grounds for dismissal of instructional staff for just cause, specifically misconduct in office and violation of the Code of Ethics of the Education Profession in Florida.
[1] A school board is not statutorily required to promulgate disciplinary guidelines establishing ranges of permissible punishments for employee infractions.
[2] Instructional staff may be dismissed for just cause, which includes misconduct in office, incompetency, gross insubordination, willful neglect of duty, or conviction of a…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Just cause includes, but is not limited to, the following instances, as defined by rule of the State Board of Education: misconduct in office, incompetency, gross insubordination, willful neglect of duty, or conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude.”
Establishes the statutory grounds for dismissal of instructional staff and the legal basis for Mitchell's termination
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCedric Mitchell was one of several teachers who obtained academic credits from Eastern Oklahoma State College for courses he did not complete. He used…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Willful Neglect Of Duty cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Cedric J. Mitchell appeals from a final order of The School Board of Miami-Dade County which adopted the recommended order of the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) terminating Mitchell’s employment. We affirm.
Mitchell was one of a number of teachers who obtained academic credits for courses from Eastern Oklahoma State College for which he did no work.1 He used these credits to obtain his teacher certification.
After discovery of the fraudulent transcripts, Mitchell was suspended from his teaching position and termination proceedings were initiated. Mitchell requested a hearing before the Department of Administrative Hearings. The ALJ recommended termination. The School Board adopted the ALJ’s findings of fact, conclusions of law and recommendations in its final order. Mitchell appeals.
Mitchell argues that this Court should require the School Board to promulgate disciplinary guidelines establishing ranges of permissible punishments to be visited upon the School Board’s employees for specified infractions. He states that a few months before his termination, the School Board suspended (rather than terminated) another teacher for a similar infraction. Sch. Bd. of Miami-Dade County v. Nappier, 2006 WL 2826969 (DOAH Case No. 06-1755) (Recommended Order Sept. 29, 2006). The School Board argues that there were distinguishing factors in the Nappier case. Mitchell acknowledges that the Nappier case does not bind the School Board to impose the same discipline in his case, but contends that the absence of guidelines allows inconsistent results to occur in disciplinary cases.
We reject Mitchell’s argument because there is no statutory requirement for the School Board to promulgate guidelines, although the School Board is free to do so if it chooses.2 By statute, instructional staff may be dismissed for just cause. § 1012.33(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2003). “Just cause includes, but is not limited to, the following instances, as defined by rule of the State Board of Education: misconduct in office, incompetency, gross insubordination, willful neglect of duty, or conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude.” Id. The ALJ found that the conduct involved here fell within the scope of the statute, id., and implementing regulations. See Fla. Admin. Code R. 6B-1.001 (Code of Ethics of the Education Profession in Florida) and R. 6B-1.006 (Principles of Professional Conduct for the Education Profession in Florida).
Because the discipline imposed was authorized by the applicable statute, the order now before us is affirmed.
. The School Board learned of the enterprise being run by a School Board employee through a 2005 Grand Jury report on teachers who were obtaining college credits without performing any academic work.
. The parties agree that this case does not involve any collective bargaining agreement.