Opinion

Cox v. Zanesville City School Dist. Bd., Unpublished Decision (8-11-2004)

  • 2004 Ohio 4253
Court
Ohio Court of Appeals
Filed
Aug 11, 2004
Status
Unpublished
On the bench
WISE, J.
Cited by
2 cases

The opinion

{¶ 52} I respectfully dissent from the majority's opinion. I find the trial court did in fact use its own interpretation of the facts surrounding the termination, thereby disregarding its burden and substituting its interpretation of the facts for the Board's interpretation.

{¶ 53} From my review, I find the substance of the evaluations and the cited "Areas of Improvement" revolved around a lack of classroom discipline. In response to this evaluation, appellee criticized the evaluations and denied that the issues raised were her fault. Defendant's Exhibit 12, Board of Education Record. The evaluation could not of done or suggested anything more to fulfill the directives of R.C. 3319.111 . The evaluation procedures met the statute's directives.

{¶ 54} I would find the Board's decision was not unlawful, arbitrary nor against the manifest weight of the evidence.

For the reasons stated in our accompanying Memorandum-Opinion, the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas of Muskingum County, Ohio, is affirmed.

Costs assessed to the Board.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.