DJ> MS> The state supreme court ruled that nothing he had done was
DJ> MS> bad enough to justify firing him.
DJ> 
DJ> I'm not a lawyer, but I thought the supreme court review the 
DJ> procuedure and constitutionality of the case, not the merits. 
    The courts not only decide if the school system trying to fire a tenured 
teacher has observed correct procedure, they also (in this state) interpret 
the tenure law's standards as to just how bad a tenured teacher must be in 
order for a firing to be sustained.  Appellate cases here show this is a 
consistent issue in court appeals.  In the top case on tenure here (Thompson 
vs. Bd. of Ed.), the entire court opinion is devoted to the issue of "is the 
teacher bad enough", not to was he given adequate hearings.
DJ> Sounds like there were bad lawyers as well as administrators. 
    If bad lawyering was the problem, it would not have pervaded all the 
state's appellate cases on tenure.  It also would not account for why in the 
definitive case (Thompson vs. Bd. of Ed.) the trial and intermediate courts 
sustained the firing, while the supreme court said the teacher involved was 
not bad enough to fire.
--- Simplex BBS (v1.07.00Beta [DOS])
---------------