noting that the plaintiff "filed suit . . . alleging breach of contract and violation of his constitutional rights, in that the Board failed to follow the procedures" in question (emphasis added)
How later courts described this case
- noting that the plaintiff "filed suit . . . alleging breach of contract and violation of his constitutional rights, in that the Board failed to follow the procedures" in question (emphasis added)
- “The board and its members are im mune from tort actions in their official capacities by reason of sovereign immunity.”
- reviewing § 14 immunity as applied to a county board of education independently from § 14 immunity as applied to state colleges and universities
- affirming the dismissal of a claim where “the appellants did not sufficiently allege the requisite elements”
Written by the judges who cited it.
Distinguished
Distinguished by Franks v. Hampton, 189 So. 3d 14 (2015)
” Belcher, 474 So.2d at 1068. Belcher is distinguishable, however, because it involved a motion to dismiss, and the present case involves a motion for a summary judgment.
The opinion
I deem it necessary to write because the majority should have distinguished this case from Gowens v. Cherokee County Bd. of Ed. , 348 So.2d 441 (Ala. 1977), the case relied upon by the trial court. The issue presented in this case is not the same as that presented in Gowens . The issue here is whether a teacher has an action for breach of contract when the Board fails to follow seemingly applicable Board policy. In Gowens , we concluded that the Board policy was not applicable to the facts in that case.