NO DUE PROCESS FOR COACH
Edward Watkins had been serving as a volunteer coach for a girls’ high school basketball team when a report surfaced that he had “engaged in inappropriate conduct.”
After the Special Commissioner of Investigation for the New York City School District (SCI) conducted an investigation and concluded that Watkins “had engaged in inappropriate and extensive telephone contact with four female students,” the New York City Department of Education (DOE) placed Watkins on its Ineligible/Inquiry List.
In Matter of Watkins v. New York City Department of Education, Watkins challenged the DOE’s decision and argued that SCI’s report was made “illegally, arbitrarily and capriciously,” and, that its decision should be vacated. But, the New York County Supreme Court sided with the DOE, and granted the agency's motion to dismiss the case.
On appeal, the Appellate Division, First Department, found that the SCI’s report and the DOE’s decision were rational and substantially supported by telephone records. In addition, the AD1 held that, “DOE was not required to afford [Watkins] notice or an opportunity to be heard prior to making its determination since he had no legitimate claim of entitlement to continue his role as a volunteer coach.”
The AD1 was also unmoved by his “stigma-plus” due process claim,* since Watkins “had not denied the truth of the central factual assertions.” In addition, the court noted that the DOE could not “be held responsible for speculation and rumors that may have been spread by members of the school community concerning the reasons for the nonparty SCI investigation.”
As a result, the case’s dismissal was unanimously affirmed.
Apparently, the ball is now back in Watkins’ court. Is anyone coaching him on what to do next?
To download a copy of the Appellate Division’s decision, please use this link: Matter of Watkins v. New York City Department of Education
____________________
*A stigma-plus due process claim is designed to protect public employees from the dissemination of damaging employment information. The process prohibits release of that data until the employee is afforded the procedural protection of a name-clearing hearing.
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.nyrealestatelawblog.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1881
Comments
Pig.
Posted by: Maria S. | March 18, 2008 4:02 PM
Watkins being placed on the "ineligible/inquiry" list effectively bars him from public employment for life. It appears that he had no hearing, no access to the evidence the DOE based its decision upon or any opportunity to administratively contest the determination in writing.
While we might snicker at the thought of this guy acting as a "volunteer girls' high school basketball coach" when he apparently had no daughter on the team, he is still entitled to some form of due process. He has been blacklisted; he doesn't know why and he can't do anything about it.
Posted by: Anonymous | March 18, 2008 5:10 PM
Oink, oink! Here I am sweetie-pie!
Posted by: ALesbo | March 18, 2008 6:32 PM
I would have agreed with you, Mr. (or Ms.) Anonymous, had Coach Watkins not admitted guilt.
Since he was only a volunteer, rather than an employee, I don't think that helped him either.
Predators should learn a lesson: Leave our kids alone!
Posted by: Sy Mann | March 18, 2008 7:37 PM
No Sy. He never made any admission. There was never any process here. He was put in a position of bringing a proceeding to challenge a determination he never had an opportunity to contest administratively. He never received any instrument to deny. The only apparent evidence against this guy was some sort of unrevealed statements and "phone records." I doubt he ever got to examine any of this "evidence."
Just because this guy is charged as a "sexual predator" is no excuse to permit an erosion of due process. As any student of the Fourth Amendment can tell you, "Red Hunts," the "War on Drugs," the "Global War on Terror, ", etc., etc., etc., have been used as excuses to erode Americans' rights to the privacy of their persons and property. It is the duty of all right thinking Americans to oppose attacks on our liberties by governmental oppression, even when it means defending someone whose behavior we may find reprehensible.
Watkins might be guilty of some misdeed, but he is entitled to know what it was and present a defense.
BTW, Everyone should watch the current "John Adams" series on HBO to refresh our recollection about what this country stands for. Laura Linney playing Abigail is also a good enough reason to watch (sorry Lesbo).
Posted by: Gines Pasamonte | March 19, 2008 10:22 AM
Pigs get slaughtered.
Posted by: Maria | March 19, 2008 10:31 AM