THOMAS L. BERKNER, PETITIONER,
v.
THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA, JOYE STONESTREET, CHAIRMAN, RESPONDENT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court denied a petition for a writ of mandamus, finding that a school principal transferred to a program coordinator position was not entitled to be returned to his principal status. The court determined the new position was similar and his salary and contract status remained unimpaired.
No, the principal is not entitled to be returned to his former position. The court found that the program coordinator position was similar to the principal position, and because the petitioner's salary and continuing contract status remained unimpaired, the relief sought was denied.
[1] A person holding a continuing contract as a principal is entitled to continue in that position or a similar position in the district at the authorized salary schedule unt…
[2] A writ of mandamus will be denied when the petitioner fails to demonstrate that their current position is dissimilar to their former position or that their salary schedul…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Each person to whom a continuing contract has been issued as provided herein shall be entitled to continue in his position or in a similar position in the district at the salary schedule authorized by the school board without the necessity for annual nomination or reappointment until such time as the position is discontinued, the person resigns, or his contractual status is changed as prescribed below.”
This quote from the statute outlines the rights of individuals with continuing contracts.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePetitioner, a principal with a continuing contract for nine years, was transferred to a program coordinator position when two schools merged. He sough…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Continuing Contract Status cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus to command the Orange County School Board to return him to his status as a principal. Petitioner has been a principal for twenty-seven years and holder of a continuing contract for nine years. When Dillard Street Elementary School and Winter Garden Elementary School were combined the Board transferred petitioner from the status of principal to that of program coordinator. Thereupon, petitioner sought mandamus here to require the Board to return him to his former status as a principal.
Section 231.36(3)(e), Florida Statutes (1977), provides:
Each person to whom a continuing contract has been issued as provided herein shall be entitled to continue in his position or in a similar position in the district at the salary schedule authorized by the school board without the necessity for annual nomination or reappointment until such time as the position is discontinued, the person resigns, or his contractual status is changed as prescribed below.
Petitioner contends the position of program coordinator is neither similar to that of principal nor does it command the same salary schedule.
At our direction the Agency held a hearing to determine whether the positions were similar. The recommended order of the Hearing Officer, adopted by the .agency, found that although the two positions are not identical they are similar. He also found that although the salary schedule for a program coordinator is less than that for a principal the Superintendent had ordered petitioner be paid pursuant to the same salary schedule used for principals. He found also that petitioner was to remain on continuing contract status.
Upon those findings, specifically, that petitioner’s salary is commensurate with that of a principal, petitioner is being paid the same salary as a principal, his continuing contract status remains unimpaired, and that the two positions are similar, we find the requested relief should be denied.
The Petition for Writ of Mandamus is denied.
DOWNEY, C. J., and CROSS and DAUKSCH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ferris A. French v. The Sch. Bd. OF Polk Cnty., 568 So. 2d 497 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)…transfer. See § 120.57, Fla.Stat. (1989). We find the cases which the School Board cites in support of the contrary conclusion to be inapposite. In particular, the principals whose positions were altered in Berkner v. School Board of Orange County, 373 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979), cert. denied, 383 So. 2d 1190 (Fla.1980) and Osburn v. School Board of Okaloosa County, 451 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984) were afforded an administrative hearing to determine whether the School Boards’ actions in those cases co…
-
Osburn v. The Sch. Bd. OF Okaloosa Cnty., 451 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)…prescribed below. Under these statutory provisions, Osburn was entitled, upon the closing of Carver-Hill, to be assigned to another principalship or other similar position in the Okaloosa school system. See Berkner v. School Board of Orange County, 373 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); Burns v. School Board of Palm Beach County, 283 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973). The assistant principalship which Osburn now occupies at the junior high school is certainly not identical to the position of principal. But that is…
-
Jones v. Miami-Dade Cnty., 816 So. 2d 824 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)…osition of assistant principal or principal. See Shaffer v. School Bd. of Martin County, 543 So. 2d 335, 336 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Greene v. School Bd. of Hamilton County, 501 So. 2d 50, 51 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Berkner v. School Bd. of Orange County, 373 So. 2d 54, 55 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); 1968 Op. Att’y Gen. Fla. 068-9 (1968).2 The plain language of each of the appellant’s annual contracts for assistant principal, principal, and staff assistant indicated that there was no entitlement to continued employment…