Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

MILLER v. SCH. DIST. NO. 167

February 9, 1973

MAX MILLER, PLAINTIFF,
v.
SCHOOL DISTRICT NUMBER 167, COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Bauer, District Judge.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

This cause comes on the defendants motion to strike and dismiss the Amended Complaint.

The plaintiff, Max Miller, has been employed for two years as a full-time mathematics teacher at Brookwood Junior High School, School District Number 167, Glenwood, Illinois. The defendants are School District Number 167, in Cook County, Illinois ("School District"); the following members of the School Board of District 167: Kathleen Huck, Gene Kappel, John Dougherty, Robert Brady, Robert Leuder, Sr., Weldon Nygren, and Barton Herr, and Louis Prevost, Superintendent of Schools of School District Number 167. This is a civil rights action based on the alleged deprivation of the plaintiff's right in his dismissal from employment as a teacher in the School District. Jurisdiction is based on Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. § 1343(3). The plaintiff, in his Amended Complaint, seeks both injunctive relief and damages.

The relevant facts are as follows. In March of 1971 plaintiff was a probationary teacher under a second annual contract of employment with the School District. If the Board of Education has renewed his contract for the upcoming 1971-72 school year, plaintiff would automatically have become "tenured" by operation of Illinois law. See, Chapter 122 § 24-11.

In a letter dated March 18, 1971 plaintiff was advised that the Board of Education, upon review of his performance and the recommendation of his superintendent, had decided that it was in the best interests of the district not to issue him a teaching contract for the 1971-72 school year. The letter was received within the statutory period of time for such notice of dismissal and set out the following reasons for that decision:

1. Difficulty in relating to pupils.

2. Difficulty in relating to parents.

  3. Children express themselves as unable to
  understand your explanations and assignments.

4. Weak in the area of class control-discipline.

  5. Performed personal work during class time rather
  than instructing pupils several times.

6. Inadequate in maintaining attention of the pupils.

7. Inadequate motivation of pupils.

  8. Mastery of subject matter by class less than
  capability of class.
  9. Improvement in above weaknesses not sufficient for
  an experienced teacher after two ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.