Mississippi Code
Miss. Code Ann. § 37-9-109 (2026)
Rights of employee receiving notice of nonrenewal generally; request for hearing; finality of decision
✓ current as of July 2026
An employee who has received notice under Section 37-9-105, upon written request from the employee received by the district within ten (10) days of receipt of the notice by the employee, shall be entitled to:
- (a) Written notice of the specific reasons for nonreemployment, together with a summary of the factual basis therefor, a list of witnesses and a copy of documentary evidence substantiating the reasons intended to be presented at the hearing, which notice shall be given at least fourteen (14) days prior to any hearing; if the district fails to provide this information to the employee, then the recommendation for nonreemployment shall be null and void, and the board shall order the execution of a contract with the employee for an additional period of one (1) year;
- (b) An opportunity for a hearing at which to present matters relevant to the reasons given for the proposed nonreemployment, including any reasons alleged by the employee to be the reason for nonreemployment; provided, however, that any school superintendent whose employment has been terminated by the school board under Section 37-9-59, or whose employment contract has not been renewed by the school board shall not have the right to request a hearing before the school board or a hearing officer;
- (c) Receive a fair and impartial hearing before the board or hearing officer; provided, however, that any school superintendent whose employment has been terminated by the school board under Section 37-9-59, or whose employment contract has not been renewed by the school board shall not have the right to request a hearing before the school board or a hearing officer;
- (d) Be represented by legal counsel, at his own expense.
Any employee requesting a hearing shall provide the district, not less than five (5) days before the scheduled date for the hearing, a response to the specific reasons for nonreemployment, a list of witnesses and a copy of documentary evidence in support of the response intended to be presented at the hearing. If the employee fails to provide this information, then the recommendation of nonreemployment shall be final without the necessity of a hearing.
If the employee does not request a hearing, the recommendation regarding the nonreemployment of the employee shall be final.
Laws, 1974, ch. 577, § 5; Laws, 1977, ch. 489, § 3; Laws, 2001, ch. 459, § 5; Laws, 2012, ch. 440, § 1, eff. 7/1/2012.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1985–2022 · leading case: Kristi Dearman v. Stone Cnty. Sch. Dist., 832 F.3d 577 (5th Cir. 2016).
Kristi Dearman v. Stone Cnty. Sch. Dist., 832 F.3d 577 (5th Cir. 2016). “Code § 37- 9-109’s protections against arbitrary dismissal act to create an expectation in continued employment.”
Burks v. Amite Cnty. Sch. Dist., 708 So. 2d 1366 (Miss. 1998). “This appeal is from a decision in the Chancery Court of Amite County, finding that the decision by the Amite County School Board to not renew the employment contract of Alvin Burks under Miss. Code Ann. § 37-9-109 et al., was neither racially motivated nor arbitrary and…”
Wilder v. Hazlehurst City Sch. Dist., 969 So. 2d 83 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007). “Miss.Code Ann. § 37-9-109. The case sub judice is not a nonrenewal action; it is a dismissal action, and, therefore, the preceding section is inapplicable.”
McMullen v. Starkville Oktibbeha Consol. Sch. Dist., 200 F. Supp. 3d 649 (N.D. Miss. 2016). “Normally, Mississippi’s Education Employment Procedures Law would have required the District to provide McMullen with written notice of her termination, Miss. Code Ann. § 37-9-105 , and a formal hearing at her request.”
Noxubee Cnty. Bd. of Educ. v. Overton, 483 So. 2d 301 (Miss. 1985). “Miss. Code Ann. § 37-9-109 (Supp. 1985). Superintendent Dickson responded with a letter dated May 13, 1983, scheduling a hearing before the Board on May 23, 1983.”
Idom v. Natchez-Adams Sch. Dist., 115 F. Supp. 3d 792 (S.D. Miss. 2015). “Miss.Code Ann. § 37-9-109(a)-(c) (2012). Neither side has placed the language of the district policies into the record for the Court to analyze, but the Court assumes that they are modeled on the statutory requirements.”
Byrd v. Greene Cnty. Sch. Dist., 633 So. 2d 1018 (Miss. 1994). “Miss. Code Ann. § 37-9-109 (c) (1990) provides that an employee who has received notice that his contract with a school district will not be renewed is entitled to receive "a fair and impartial hearing before the board or a hearing officer.”
Buck v. Lowndes Cnty. Sch. Dist., 761 So. 2d 144 (Miss. 2000). “" Miss.Code Ann. § 37-9-109(b) (1996). The statute provides for a fair and impartial hearing to allow the teacher to prove that the Board's decision is not based on fact.”
Greenwood Sch. Dist. v. Mdes, 962 So. 2d 684 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007). “" Miss.Code Ann. § 37-9-105 (Supp.2006) (emphasis added).”
Laurel Sch. Dist. v. Tito Lanier (Miss. Ct. App. 2022). “Miss. Code Ann. § 37-9-109 (b). At this statutorily required hearing, Lanier would have been able to determine whether he had a “legitimate claim of entitlement to continued employment” as he brought his case before the Laurel School Board.”
Novella Buck v. Lowndes Cnty. Sch. Dist. (Miss. 1998). “Miss. Code Ann. § 37-9-109 (a) (Rev. 1996).”
Greenville Pub. Sch. Dist. v. Yolanda Thomas (Miss. 2022). “See Miss. Code Ann.§ 37-9-109 to -111 (Rev. 2019).”
Miss. Code Ann. § 37-9-109(a): 1 case
Idom v. Natchez-Adams Sch. Dist., 115 F. Supp. 3d 792 (S.D. Miss. 2015). “Miss.Code Ann. § 37-9-109(a)-(c) (2012). Neither side has placed the language of the district policies into the record for the Court to analyze, but the Court assumes that they are modeled on the statutory requirements.”
Miss. Code Ann. § 37-9-109(b): 1 case
Buck v. Lowndes Cnty. Sch. Dist., 761 So. 2d 144 (Miss. 2000). “" Miss.Code Ann. § 37-9-109(b) (1996). The statute provides for a fair and impartial hearing to allow the teacher to prove that the Board's decision is not based on fact.”
Miss. Code Ann. § 37-9-109(d): 1 case
Kristi Dearman v. Stone Cnty. Sch. Dist., 832 F.3d 577 (5th Cir. 2016). “Code § 37- 9-109’s protections against arbitrary dismissal act to create an expectation in continued 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.