Unworthy Justices

SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY, 2009. 557
198 N.J.  

Leang v. Jersey City Bd. of Educ. Cite as, 198 N.J. 557

969 A.2d 1097
SOPHARIE LEANG AND SONG LEANG, PLAINTIFFS—RESPONDENTS,
v. JERSEY CITY BOARD OF EDUCATION, VLADIMIR
ASHWORTH, CHARLES T. EPPS, JR., (IN HIS CAPACITY AS
VICE PRINCIPAL) AND ANGELA BRUNO, DEFENDANTS—APPELLANTS,
AND JANE AND JOHN DOES 1-5, DEFENDANTS.
SOPHARIE LEANG AND SONG LEANG, PLAINTIFFS—RESPONDENTS,
v. JERSEY CITY MEDICAL CENTER MOBILE CRISIS
UNIT AND THE JERSEY CITY MEDICAL CENTER, DEFENDANTS—
APPELLANTS, AND JERSEY CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT,
JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-5 BEING EMPLOYEES OF
THE JERSEY CITY MEDICAL CENTER MOBILE CRISIS UNIT
AND/OR THE JERSEY CITY MEDICAL CENTER AND JOHN
AND JANE DOES 6-10 BEING EMPLOYEES OF THE JERSEY
CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT AND CITY OF JERSEY CITY,
DEFENDANTS.
Argued January 5, 2009--Decided April 16, 2009.

SYNOPSIS

Background: Provisional teacher brought one action against city board of education and individual employees thereof, asserting false imprisonment, battery, assault, invasion of privacy, defamation, slander and libel, sexual harassment, breach of employment contract, due process violations, wrongful discharge,intentional infliction of emotional distress, and per quod claim, and second action asserting related claims against city medical center, its mobile crisis unit, city police department, and individual employees thereof. Actions were consolidated. 

The Superior Court, Law Division, Hudson County, granted motions of school defendants and medical defendants for summary judgment. Following denial of their motion for reconsideration, plaintiffs appealed. The Superior Court, Appellate Division, 399 N.J.Super. 329, 944 A.2d 675, affirmed in part and reversed in part, and certification was granted.  

Holdings: The Supreme Court, Hoens, J., held that:

(1) failure of school officials to renew non-tenured public school teacher's one year contract could not
(2) board did not breach contract of teacher;  support teacher's  claim for common law wrongful discharge;

(3) teacher received all process that was due her with regard to nonrenewal of contract;
(4) principal and a colleague of teacher were not deprived of qualified immunity under federal statute because of alleged bad faith;
(5) allegations of teacher were sufficient to state claim for defamation;
(6) allegations of actual malice or willful disregard of likelihood of harm were sufficient to support claim for punitive damages;
(7) allegations were sufficient to state claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress beyond scope of qualified immunity; and
(8) principal did not commit tort of intrusion on seclusion and invade privacy of public school teacher.
 

Court of appeals decision affirmed in part and reversed in part.

APPELLATE DIVISION. 329
399 N.J.Super

N.J.Super. Leang Jersey City Bd. of Education Cite as, 399 N.J.Super. 329

944 Aid 675
SOPHARIE LEANG AND SONG LEANG, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS
v. JERSEY CITY BOARD OF EDUCATION, VLADIMIR
ASHWORTH, CHARLES T. EPPS, JR. (IN HIS CAPACITY AS
VICE PRINCIPAL), AND ANGELA BRUNO, DEFENDANTSRESPONDENTS,
AND SOPHARIE LEANG AND SONG LEANG,
PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. JERSEY CITY MEDICAL CENTER
MOBILE CRISIS UNIT, THE JERSEY CITY MEDICAL
CENTER, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS, AND JERSEY CITY
POLICE DEPARTMENT, JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-5 BEING
EMPLOYEES OF THE JERSEY CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT
AND CITY OF JERSEY CITY, DEFENDANTS.
 






Superior Court of New Jersey
Appellate Division
Argued December 17, 2007—Decided April 2, 2008_
SYNOPSIS

Background: Provisional teacher brought one action against city board of education and individual employees thereof, as setting false imprisonment, battery, assault, invasion of privacy, defamation, slander and libel, sexual harassment, breach of employment contract, due process violations, wrongful discharge, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and per quod claim, and second action asserting related claims against city medical center, its mobile crisis unit, city police department, and individual employees thereof. Actions were consolidated.  The Superior Court, Law Division, Hudson County, granted motions of school defendants and medical defendants for summary judgment. Following denial of their motion for reconsideration, plaintiffs appealed. 

Holdings: The Superior Court, Appellate Division, C.L. Miniman, J.A.D., held that:
(1) motion court erred in deeming admitted defendants' statement of undisputed facts;
(2) school district employees were not entitled to qualified immunity from suit under § 1983;
(3) board of education could not be held liable on theory of respondeat superior for § 1983 violations alleged to have been committed by its employees;
(4) public employees' immunity from suit based upon good faith execution or enforcement of law did not apply to tort action for false imprisonment;
(5) public employees' unsupported assertion of good faith execution or enforcement of law did not entitle them to immunity under Tort Claims Act (TCA);
(6) limitations on recoverable damages for intentional torts were removed by plain language of TCA; and
(7) fact that teacher had no expectation of employment beyond end of school year did not require dismissal of her breach of contract claim.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

Paradox

Supreme Court Holding

1) failure of school officials to renew non-tenured public school teacher's one year contract could not support teacher's  claim for common law wrongful discharge;

Appellate Court Holding

(7) fact that teacher had no expectation of employment beyond end of school year did not require dismissal of her breach of contract claim.

STATE OF NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

OFFICE OF FISCAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND COMPLIANCE

INVESTIGATIONS UNIT
REPORT OF EXAMINATION – JANUARY 2010
COMPENSATION AND OPERATIONS REVIEW
BERGEN COUNTY TECHNICAL SCHOOL DISTRICT
 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

During October, November and December 2009, the Office of Fiscal Accountability and Compliance (OFAC) conducted a limited review of senior staff compensation and business office practices of the Bergen County Technical School District (the BCTS or the district). The review was initiated following the receipt of numerous concerns that district administrators were inappropriately allocating educational dollars to enhance their compensation and were engaged in empire building to the disadvantage of the student population. The complaining parties submitted extensive documentation covering approximately 25 issues. Due to the similar nature of several of those issues, the 25 issues were consolidated into 16 distinct allegations.

To determine the validity of the concerns raised by the complainants, the OFAC conducted a general review of overall district business operations. The review was limited in scope to examining compensation for the superintendent, assistant superintendent, the special assistant to the superintendent, business administrator, and technology coordinator. A detailed examination of employment contracts, travel expenses and auditor selected functions of the district were conducted to determine compliance to educational statute, code and adherence to generally accepted business practices. The review included examining the district budget, board minutes, invoices, employment contracts, payroll, tuition, and revenues, and expenses, for specific programs and operations. Programs and operations examined included the Regional Emergency Management Service (REMS), Cape Program, Carol White Grant, Workforce Investment Board (WIB) and the interrelationship between the BCTS and the Bergen County Vocational and Technical Schools Foundation (the Foundation).1
Although the OFAC examiners conducting the review determined that many of the concerns raised by the complainants were unsubstantiated, the review did disclose various deficiencies and matters of concern. The examiners noted that daily attendance records do not support the payments made to the superintendent for unused vacation, sick and compensatory days. The examiners noted that the attendance records contained alterations, ongoing balances did not reconcile with the prior year record and district payment authorizations memorialized duplicate payments for the same date. The payments made for unused vacation and sick time lacked detailed support as did amounts expended by the district for travel, food and social activities.
1 The Bergen County Vocational and Technical Schools Foundation is a nonprofit organization that was formed by individuals to support the educational objectives of the Vocational and Technical Schools.

Report of Examination – February 2010
Bergen County Technical School District – Compensation and Operations Review
Page 2
 

The dollar value of payments issued to the superintendent for the buyback of unused vacation, sick and compensatory time that was made without appropriate review, authorization and/or board approval exceeds $463,000. The examination also confirmed that district funds had been utilized to pay for costs incurred by the private nonprofit Foundation.

The OFAC examination confirmed that the district approved payments for items that lacked required itemization and failed to fully comply with various provisions of the newly enacted accountability regulations such as maintaining logs for the vehicles that are permanently assigned to district staff and limiting expenditures for travel and meals. The examiners also noted that the district expended funds for various discretionary items that could have been better allocated to further educational needs.

Toward the conclusion of the OFAC investigation, the superintendent was placed on administrative leave and an interim superintendent assumed control of the districts. The newly assigned interim superintendent took immediate steps to correct deficiencies and ensure compliance with statute and code.

The issues raised by the complainants, the investigation conducted, and the determinations arrived at by the OFAC examiners, as well as actions taken to correct deficiencies are detailed in the remainder of this report. As a result of the findings, the district will be required to submit a corrective action plan (CAP) to the OFAC indicating the action it will initiate to correct any remaining deficiencies, ensure future compliance and recover any non-allowable costs.

My 2 Cents 

1) The Appellate Judges saw the abject injustice inflected upon plaintiff  Sopharie Leang.

2) The Supreme Judges sided with the corrupt board of education and threw Plaintiff Leang on the street.

3) The Office of Fiscal Accountability responded to the public outcry against the thuggery of the Superintendent Robert Aloia and the corruption of the board of education.

At the end: Justice failed at the Supreme Court + Lip service at the clerk's office of the Fiscal Accountability.