An Ohio court has thrown out a fired Cedarville University professor's claim that he was wrongfully terminated, holding that it could not pass judgment on the personnel decision without unconstitutionally intruding into the Baptist college's religious affairs.
Wrongful termination was one of several claims made in the lawsuit filed by David M. Hoffeditz, who was fired from a job in Cedarville's biblical-studies department in July 2007.
In a decision issued this week, Judge J. Timothy Campbell of the Greene County Common Pleas Court said Cedarville had accused Mr. Hoffeditz of violating its religious principles in its decision to dismiss him. Although Mr. Hoffeditz had said he was fired for reasons other than matters of religion and faith, Judge Campbell said he remained convinced that there was enough of a religious element to the controversy that he would be unable to pass judgment on whether the firing was for just cause without wading into matters of religious doctrine, in violation of the First Amendment.
Judge Campbell rejected the university's request to dismiss a separate claim by Mr. Hoffeditz alleging that it committed fraud by extending his contract into the 2007-8 academic year without telling him it intended to fire him once it had gotten through the accreditation process. The judge did not rule on a third claim by Mr. Hoffeditz, that the university defamed him.
The American Association of University Professors has censured Cedarville over the termination of Mr. Hoffeditz, saying the institution failed to demonstrate cause for its actions in a hearing before the professor's peers. Cedarville has called the AAUP investigation of the firing flawed and accused the association of bias against religious institutions. The university's Board of Trustees and a faculty panel there have issued conflicting accounts of the events surrounding the professor's removal.
Comments
1. zegron - September 25, 2009 at 08:23 am
The interesting thing is that even though the judge threw out the Breach of Contract claim, he upheld the Fraud claim.
Fraud is the worst claim and was the only claim that carries punitive damages (which, aside from compensatory damages for $ lost and attorneys fees, it ALSO allows a jury to 'punish' the University as a deterrent effect).
So if CU/President/Trustees were hoping to avoid a jury trial they just lost.
The court case so far has brought out a lot of very interesting details, including the full transcript of the Grievance Committee findings.
So far in the court documents I've read they've not been able to provide evidence of the professor's "professional misconduct" or any records of any previous disciplinary actions.
Depositions are slated to start according to the docket within 90 days (November 22, 2009). Depositions are the closest thing to an interrogation that is legal.