Baker v. Board of Ed., County of Hancock (dissenting)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
No. 26567 -- Martha J. Baker v. Board of Education, County of Hancock FILED Starcher, J., dissenting: RELEASED July 13, 2000 July 14, 2000 DEBORAH L. McHENRY, CLERK SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA I do not think that the circuit court erred in reinstating Ms. Baker. She was clearly entitled to a formal, written, improvement plan. The majority strains to find reasons that she was not entitled to such a plan, but ultimately the majority concedes that she might be so entitled. The question then is: Is telling a person to be on time a formal, written improvement plan? I say No. I don t believe this Court has ever before backslid like this in a teacher s rights case -allowing a school board to come up with after the fact reasons and to ignore the requirement of meaningful, written improvement plans. Fortunately this opinion is per curiam and can be viewed as an outlier from our established law in this area. Accordingly, I dissent.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
