Caldwell v. Linker, 901 F. Supp. 1010 - Dist. Court, MD North Carolina 1995
Facts: In 1991, Sharon Caldwell was issued a one-year contract between the dates of July 1, 1992 until June 30, 1993 for the position as instructor-Program Developer that was in the continuing education division at Randolph Community College (RCC). Soon after starting her position, she informed her supervisors of harassment against her while at work that involved the vice-president of Randolph Community. In July of 1993, the next year’s new contract consisted of an offer of only two-months, and was issued by the vice-president, Allan Edwards without notifying the plaintiff. The plaintiff complained to the President of RCC, Larry K Linker regarding the harassment against her by Edwards and demanded a full-year contract instead of the two-month contract. (Sounds like a threat). The President told her …show more content…
Linker, alleging that Linker violated Caldwell’s due process when she wasn’t given proper notice that here contract want not going to be renewed, and when they infringed on her liberty by blocking the door preventing her from leaving while attempting to get the building key from her. The Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment protects individual’s life, liberty and property. Taking away someone’s rights or someone’s liberty or even their property without a process is a violation of Due process. The property was the key as well as the interest in the contract she originally signed prior to dismissal. Caldwell’s complaint was not being taken serious. This is a very important case also involving faculty and contracts. “The reviewing court ruled that the stipulation of performance criteria constituted a material element of the contract and that the teacher had indicated by her modification that she was unwilling to accept the institutions contract offer”(Fossey and Eckes, 2015, p.92). But regardless of this employee’s dismissal, standards must be put in
Facts: In 1991, Sharon Caldwell was issued a one-year contract between the dates of July 1, 1992 until June 30, 1993 for the position as instructor-Program Developer that was in the continuing education division at Randolph Community College (RCC). Soon after starting her position, she informed her supervisors of harassment against her while at work that involved the vice-president of Randolph Community. In July of 1993, the next year’s new contract consisted of an offer of only two-months, and was issued by the vice-president, Allan Edwards without notifying the plaintiff. The plaintiff complained to the President of RCC, Larry K Linker regarding the harassment against her by Edwards and demanded a full-year contract instead of the two-month contract. (Sounds like a threat). The President told her …show more content…
Linker, alleging that Linker violated Caldwell’s due process when she wasn’t given proper notice that here contract want not going to be renewed, and when they infringed on her liberty by blocking the door preventing her from leaving while attempting to get the building key from her. The Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment protects individual’s life, liberty and property. Taking away someone’s rights or someone’s liberty or even their property without a process is a violation of Due process. The property was the key as well as the interest in the contract she originally signed prior to dismissal. Caldwell’s complaint was not being taken serious. This is a very important case also involving faculty and contracts. “The reviewing court ruled that the stipulation of performance criteria constituted a material element of the contract and that the teacher had indicated by her modification that she was unwilling to accept the institutions contract offer”(Fossey and Eckes, 2015, p.92). But regardless of this employee’s dismissal, standards must be put in