Code of Alabama

Ala. Code § 36-26-102 (2026)

Nonprobationary Status; Causes for Termination.

✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaAla. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Repealed by Act 2011-270, p. 494, §14, effective July 1, 2011.

(Acts 1983, No. 83-644, p. 1004, §3.)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 33 cases, 1985–2013 · leading case: Mobile Cnty. Bd. of Sch. Commissioners v. Long, 46 So. 3d 6 (Ala. Civ. App. 2010).
Mobile Cnty. Bd. of Sch. Commissioners v. Long, 46 So. 3d 6 (Ala. Civ. App. 2010). · cites it 10× “" Therefore, the Board argues, it established a permissible reason for dismissing Long under § 36-26-102. Accordingly, the Board argues that the hearing officer should have upheld the Board's decision to dismiss Long without considering whether the Board complied with the RIF…”
Huntsville City Bd. of Educ. v. Stranahan, 130 So. 3d 204 (Ala. Civ. App. 2013). · cites it 11× “” Former § 36-26-102, Ala.Code 1975. The termination notices sent by the superintendent to Stranahan and Holmes stated, in pertinent part: “You are hereby given notice of my intention to recommend termination of [your employment as] a Mechanic for Huntsville City Board of…”
Bd. of Sch. Commissioners v. Christopher, 97 So. 3d 163 (Ala. Crim. App. 2012). · cites it 6× “Former § 36-26-102 of the FDA, which was effective at the time Christopher was notified of the decision to seek termination of her employment and at the time she first contested that notification, provided: “Upon the completing by the employee of said probationary period, said…”
Bishop State Cmty. Coll. v. Williams, 4 So. 3d 1152 (Ala. Civ. App. 2008). · cites it 6× “2000) — is derived from two provisions of the FDA, § 36-26-102, Ala. Code 1975, and § 36-26-104(a), Ala.”
Glass v. Anniston City Bd. of Educ., 957 So. 2d 1143 (Ala. Civ. App. 2006). · cites it 4× “' Ala.Code (1975), § 36-26-102." Woodham v.”
Ex Parte Athens State Coll., 795 So. 2d 709 (Ala. 2000). · cites it 6× “The Court of Civil Appeals, construing § 36-26-102, Ala.Code 1975 (the Fair Dismissal Act), in pari materia with § 16-24-8 (the Teacher Tenure Act), upheld the panel's decision requiring Athens State to place Ruth in another nonteacher position for which she was "qualified.”
Bishop State Cmty. Coll. v. Archible, 33 So. 3d 577 (Ala. Civ. App. 2008). · cites it 3× ““The termination of your employment with Bishop State is proposed for the following reasons as authorized by Code of Alabama (1975), § 36-26-102: failure to perform your duties in a satisfactory manner, immorality, and/or other good and just causes.”
Bishop State Cmty. Coll. v. Archible, 33 So. 3d 588 (Ala. Civ. App. 2009). · cites it 4× “070379, the notice of proposed termination provided to Angelo Archible contained the following “short and plain statement of the facts” purporting to show that “the termination is taken for one or more of the reasons listed in Section 36-26-102:” “The termination of your…”
Athens State Coll. v. Ruth, 795 So. 2d 703 (Ala. Civ. App. 1999). · cites it 5× “" § 36-26-102. That section further provides, however, that "such termination of employment shall not be made for political or personal reasons on the part of any party recommending or voting to approve said termination.”
Bishop State Cmty. Coll. v. Thomas, 13 So. 3d 978 (Ala. Civ. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “” § 36-26-102, Ala.Code 1975. If an employee properly contests the termination of his or her employment, see § 36-26-103(b), Ala.”
Huntsville City Bd. of Educ. v. Sharp, 137 So. 3d 917 (Ala. Civ. App. 2013). · cites it 4× “Ann Roy Moore, read as follows: “You are hereby given notice of my intention to recommend termination of [your] employment [as] a Mechanic for Huntsville City Board of Education as provided in § 36-26-102, Ala.Code 1975. The reason for the proposed termination is as follows:…”
Clayton v. Bd. of Sch. Com'rs, 552 So. 2d 145 (Ala. Civ. App. 1988). · cites it 3× “See Ala.Code 1975, § 36-26-102 (1985 Supp.). The Act then goes on to set up the procedure that is to be followed for *149 termination of employment.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.