Timothy Kirkland v. Northside Independent School District
890 F.2d 794, 1989 WL 146681, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 19477 (1989)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A public school teacher's unilateral decision to use a non-approved reading list, without utilizing established administrative procedures for curriculum approval, constitutes a private employment matter and is not constitutionally protected speech on a matter of public concern under the First Amendment.
Facts:
- Timothy Kirkland was a probationary world history teacher for two years at a high school in the Northside Independent School District.
- Northside provided Kirkland with an official supplemental reading list and guidelines for how to amend that list or get new materials approved.
- Kirkland was aware of the approval process but chose not to submit his own substitute reading list for the district's review.
- Without seeking or obtaining approval, Kirkland created and distributed his own supplemental reading list to his students for extra credit assignments.
- Kirkland never attended public meetings or voiced any concerns to colleagues or superiors about the school's approved list or curriculum policies prior to his contract non-renewal.
- Northside declined to renew Kirkland’s employment contract, citing his use of the non-approved list, poor supervision of a class, substandard evaluations, and poor interaction with others.
Procedural Posture:
- Timothy Kirkland sued the Northside Independent School District in federal district court, alleging violations of his First Amendment and procedural due process rights, as well as state law contract claims.
- At the conclusion of a jury trial, the court granted a directed verdict in favor of Northside on the due process and contract claims.
- The court denied Northside's motion for a directed verdict on the First Amendment claim, instead submitting the issue to the jury via special interrogatories.
- The jury returned a verdict in favor of Kirkland, awarding him $50,000 in damages.
- The trial court entered judgment on the verdict, ordering Northside to reinstate Kirkland and pay attorneys' fees.
- Northside (appellant) appealed the judgment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit; Kirkland (appellee) did not appeal the directed verdicts against him.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a public school teacher's use of a supplemental reading list that has not been approved through the school district's established procedures constitute constitutionally protected speech under the First Amendment?
Opinions:
Majority - Judge Jerry E. Smith
No. A public school teacher's use of an unapproved reading list is a private employment matter, not speech on a matter of public concern protected by the First Amendment. The court's reasoning, applying the test from Connick v. Myers, is that for a public employee's speech to be protected, it must be on a matter of 'public concern,' meaning the employee must be speaking as a 'citizen' rather than as an 'employee' in a personal dispute. Kirkland's actions were part of his role as an employee and concerned his job performance. He failed to use available administrative channels to seek approval for his list or to voice any opposition to the school's curriculum publicly or privately before his non-renewal, making his subsequent claims of censorship speculative and self-serving. Citing Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, the court affirmed that public schools have legitimate pedagogical interests in controlling their curricula, and the concept of academic freedom does not grant individual teachers unfettered discretion to disregard established administrative processes.
Analysis:
This decision significantly reinforces the authority of school districts to control and standardize their curricula. It clarifies that a teacher's in-classroom speech, specifically regarding the choice of teaching materials, is viewed as speech as an employee, not as a citizen, thus affording it less First Amendment protection. The ruling establishes that teachers must typically utilize established procedures for curriculum review before they can credibly claim that a dispute over materials is a matter of public concern about censorship. This precedent narrows the scope of 'academic freedom' at the secondary school level, making it more difficult for teachers to successfully challenge employment decisions based on their unilateral curricular choices.
Unlock the full brief for Timothy Kirkland v. Northside Independent School District