# Clayton v. BOARD OF SCHOOL COM'RS

> Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · June 8, 1988 · 552 So. 2d 145

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9936091

## Case

- **Full name:** Linda Clayton and Betty Johnson v. Board of School Commissioners of Mobile County Tobie F. Day v. Southwest State Technical College
- **Court:** Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama
- **Decided:** June 8, 1988
- **Citations:** 552 So. 2d 145
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Holmes
- **Judges:** Holmes, Ingram
- **Cited by:** 7 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Reversed on other grounds by Ex Parte Clayton, 1989 Ala. LEXIS 290 (1989).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9936091

## Opinion text

While I concur in the results reached in this case, my reasoning is somewhat different regarding the conclusion reached in the initial part of the opinion.
The majority concludes that the employees were due their salaries until the hearing, despite their contracts having "expired," on the ground that those three-month contracts were, in effect, an attempt by the school to circumvent the requirements of the Act. *Page 152
As is pointed out later in the opinion, the Act is reasonably construed as giving non-teacher employees continuing employment status analogous to the tenured status attained by teachers after a probationary period.
I would, therefore, hold that the employees in question, having attained that continuing status, could not be fired except for cause and were thus entitled to their salaries until a hearing on the issue of the reason for their termination, notwithstanding the length of their contract period.
That is, the length of the contract is irrelevant, in my opinion, in view of the right of the employees to be rehired absent a determination after a hearing that their termination was justified under the reasons given in the statute.
I believe that my reasoning on this question is in harmony with the conclusions and reasoning found elsewhere in the majority opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9936091. Public record. Not legal advice.