Palmer v. Board of Education
Description
Source: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/466/600/2361432/
"Any alleged religious overtones to those activities are not grounds for refusing to teach them. See Smith v. Denny, 280 F. Supp. 651 (E.D.Cal.1968)."
From the case summary: "When the teacher, a Jehovah's Witness, was hired to teach kindergarten, accommodations were made to have others instruct the teacher's students in patriotic exercises to which the teacher objected on religious grounds. The alternatives proved to be unduly burdensome; the following year the teacher was told to comply with the board's curriculum, including the patriotic exercises, but was given permission to express her own views to the class in a moderate way. Not only did the teacher refuse to comply, she proved to have serious deficiencies. When the teacher was discharged, she filed the instant action under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C.S. § 1343(3). The case went before the court on competing motions, and the court granted the board's motion for summary judgment. The court held that dismissal was justified because the teacher's performance was such that the board would have discharged the teacher absent the protected activity. The teacher's behavior resulted in substantial class disruption. Refusal to follow the established curriculum was not protected. Reasonable accommodation was afforded when the teacher was permitted to express the teacher's own views to the class."
"Any alleged religious overtones to those activities are not grounds for refusing to teach them. See Smith v. Denny, 280 F. Supp. 651 (E.D.Cal.1968)."
From the case summary: "When the teacher, a Jehovah's Witness, was hired to teach kindergarten, accommodations were made to have others instruct the teacher's students in patriotic exercises to which the teacher objected on religious grounds. The alternatives proved to be unduly burdensome; the following year the teacher was told to comply with the board's curriculum, including the patriotic exercises, but was given permission to express her own views to the class in a moderate way. Not only did the teacher refuse to comply, she proved to have serious deficiencies. When the teacher was discharged, she filed the instant action under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C.S. § 1343(3). The case went before the court on competing motions, and the court granted the board's motion for summary judgment. The court held that dismissal was justified because the teacher's performance was such that the board would have discharged the teacher absent the protected activity. The teacher's behavior resulted in substantial class disruption. Refusal to follow the established curriculum was not protected. Reasonable accommodation was afforded when the teacher was permitted to express the teacher's own views to the class."
Date
1979-01-31
Type
Court Case