342.175
Grounds for discipline; reinstatement.
(1) The Teacher Standards and Practices Commission may suspend or revoke the
license or registration of a commission licensee, discipline a commission
licensee, or suspend or revoke the right of any person to apply for a license
or registration based on the following:
(a) Conviction of
a crime not listed in ORS 342.143 (3);
(b) Gross neglect
of duty;
(c) Any gross
unfitness;
(d) Conviction of
a crime for violating any law of this state or any state or of the United
States involving the illegal use, sale or possession of controlled substances;
(e) Conviction of
a crime described in ORS 475C.005 to 475C.525;
(f) Any false
statement knowingly made in an application for issuance, renewal or
reinstatement of a license or registration; or
(g) Failure to
comply with any condition of reinstatement under subsection (4) of this section
or any condition of probation under ORS 342.177 (3)(b).
(2) If a person
is enrolled in an approved educator preparation program under ORS 342.147, the
commission may issue a public reprimand or may suspend or revoke the right to
apply for a license or registration based on the following:
(a) Conviction of
a crime listed in ORS 342.143 (3) or a crime described by the commission by
rule;
(b) Conviction of
a crime for violating any law of this state or any state or of the United
States involving the illegal use, sale or possession of controlled substances;
or
(c) Any conduct
that may cause the commission to issue a public reprimand for a commission
licensee or to suspend or revoke the license or registration of a commission
licensee.
(3) The
commission shall revoke any license or registration and shall revoke the right
of any person to apply for a license or registration if the person has been
convicted of any crime listed in ORS 342.143 (3).
(4)(a) Except for
convictions for crimes listed in ORS 342.143 (3) and subject to subsection (5)
of this section, any person whose license or registration has been revoked, or
whose right to apply for a license or registration has been revoked, may apply
to the commission for reinstatement of the license or registration after one
year from the date of the revocation.
(b) Any person
whose license or registration has been suspended, or whose right to apply for a
license or registration has been suspended, may apply to the commission for
reinstatement of the license or registration.
(c) The
commission may require an applicant for reinstatement to furnish evidence
satisfactory to the commission of good moral character, mental and physical
health and such other evidence as the commission may consider necessary to
establish the applicant’s fitness. The commission may impose a probationary
period and such conditions as the commission considers necessary upon approving
an application for reinstatement.
(5) The
commission shall reconsider immediately a license or registration suspension or
revocation or the situation of a person whose right to apply for a license or
registration has been revoked, upon application therefor, when the license or
registration suspension or revocation or the right revocation is based on a
criminal conviction that is reversed on appeal.
(6) Violation of
rules adopted by the commission relating to competent and ethical performance
of professional duties shall be admissible as evidence of gross neglect of duty
or gross unfitness.
(7) A copy of the
record of conviction, certified to by the clerk of the court entering the
conviction, shall be conclusive evidence of a conviction described in this
section. [Formerly 342.070; 1965 c.100 §361; 1971 c.743 §358; 1973 c.228 §1;
1979 c.226 §1; 1979 c.226 §1; 1979 c.307 §3a; 1987 c.158 §59; 1987 c.503 §7;
1991 c.662 §1; 1993 c.45 §168; 1993 c.301 §7; 1993 c.603 §1; 1995 c.768 §15;
1997 c.383 §15; 1997 c.864 §19; 1999 c.199 §10; 1999 c.308 §2; 2007 c.575 §12;
2009 c.386 §1; 2015 c.245 §11; 2015 c.647 §16; 2017 c.21 §51; 2019 c.618 §24;
2021 c.151 §2]
Notes of Decisions
Ross v. Springfield Sch. Dist. No. 19, 657 P.2d 188 (Or. 1982).
· cites it 13× “The statute lists eight grounds for dismissal and incorporates the grounds upon which a teaching certificate may be revoked set forth in ORS 342.175. It begins "No permanent teacher shall be dismissed except for * * *.”
Reguero v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 822 P.2d 1171 (Or. 1991).
· cites it 12× “" OAR 584-20-040(2) provided: "The Commission may initiate proceedings to suspend or revoke the [license] of an educator under ORS 342.175 or deny a [license] to an applicant under ORS 342.”
Talbott v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 317 P.3d 347 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 13× “On review of the ALJ’s proposed order, the TSPC determined that respondent had engaged in four instances of gross neglect of duty in violation of OAR 584-020-0040(4) and ORS 342.175 by giving false answers to two questions on an employment application and leaving an offensive…”
Robin v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 421 P.3d 385 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 5× “121 ("The Teacher Standards and Practices Commission shall issue licenses to teachers and administrators who possess the minimum competencies, knowledge and skills to teach and administer in the public schools of this state.”
Lockett v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 412 P.3d 229 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 4× “We write to address only the second assignment, in which respondent challenges TSPC's determination that respondent committed gross neglect of duty under ORS 342.175(1)(b), based on a violation of OAR 584-020-0040(4)(n).”
Finney v. Bransom, 924 P.2d 319 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 2× “175(2), which requires revocation of a teacher's license upon conviction of any one of a number of sexual offences, supports the majority's conclusion that, as a matter of law, Bransom's alleged misconduct could not have been within the course and scope of his employment. [2]…”
Ross v. Springfield Sch. Dist. No. 19, 641 P.2d 600 (Or. Ct. App. 1982).
· cites it 3× “865(1) provides, in pertinent part: “(1) No permanent teacher shall be dismissed except for: **** * “(b) Immorality; «* * * * * “(i) Any cause which constitutes grounds for the revocation of such permanent teacher’s teaching certificate; * * * «* * * * * j Grounds for revocation…”
Osuna-Bonilla v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 386 P.3d 229 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
“In September 2012, the TSPC issued a notice accusing petitioner of gross neglect of duty in violation of ORS 342.175(l)(b) and violations of related administrative rules, noted below, all involving the accusations of the complaining students.”
Cooper v. Eugene Sch. Dist. No. 4J, 708 P.2d 1161 (Or. Ct. App. 1985).
· cites it 2× “Conviction of other crimes, including drug-related crimes, gross unfitness and gross neglect of duty may subject a teacher to state-wide discipline, but the sanction may be as little as a public reprimand.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 342.175(1) — 7 cases
Reguero v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 822 P.2d 1171 (Or. 1991).
“" OAR 584-20-040(2) provided: "The Commission may initiate proceedings to suspend or revoke the [license] of an educator under ORS 342.175 or deny a [license] to an applicant under ORS 342.”
Ross v. Springfield Sch. Dist. No. 19, 657 P.2d 188 (Or. 1982).
“The statute lists eight grounds for dismissal and incorporates the grounds upon which a teaching certificate may be revoked set forth in ORS 342.175. It begins "No permanent teacher shall be dismissed except for * * *.”
Robin v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 421 P.3d 385 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
“121 ("The Teacher Standards and Practices Commission shall issue licenses to teachers and administrators who possess the minimum competencies, knowledge and skills to teach and administer in the public schools of this state.”
Ross v. Springfield Sch. Dist. No. 19, 641 P.2d 600 (Or. Ct. App. 1982).
“865(1) provides, in pertinent part: “(1) No permanent teacher shall be dismissed except for: **** * “(b) Immorality; «* * * * * “(i) Any cause which constitutes grounds for the revocation of such permanent teacher’s teaching certificate; * * * «* * * * * j Grounds for revocation…”
Talbott v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 317 P.3d 347 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
“On review of the ALJ’s proposed order, the TSPC determined that respondent had engaged in four instances of gross neglect of duty in violation of OAR 584-020-0040(4) and ORS 342.175 by giving false answers to two questions on an employment application and leaving an offensive…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 342.175(1)(b) — 3 cases
Lockett v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 412 P.3d 229 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“We write to address only the second assignment, in which respondent challenges TSPC's determination that respondent committed gross neglect of duty under ORS 342.175(1)(b), based on a violation of OAR 584-020-0040(4)(n).”
Reguero v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 822 P.2d 1171 (Or. 1991).
“" OAR 584-20-040(2) provided: "The Commission may initiate proceedings to suspend or revoke the [license] of an educator under ORS 342.175 or deny a [license] to an applicant under ORS 342.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 342.175(1)(c) — 4 cases
Ross v. Springfield Sch. Dist. No. 19, 657 P.2d 188 (Or. 1982).
“The statute lists eight grounds for dismissal and incorporates the grounds upon which a teaching certificate may be revoked set forth in ORS 342.175. It begins "No permanent teacher shall be dismissed except for * * *.”
Reguero v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 822 P.2d 1171 (Or. 1991).
“" OAR 584-20-040(2) provided: "The Commission may initiate proceedings to suspend or revoke the [license] of an educator under ORS 342.175 or deny a [license] to an applicant under ORS 342.”
Ross v. Springfield Sch. Dist. No. 19, 641 P.2d 600 (Or. Ct. App. 1982).
“865(1) provides, in pertinent part: “(1) No permanent teacher shall be dismissed except for: **** * “(b) Immorality; «* * * * * “(i) Any cause which constitutes grounds for the revocation of such permanent teacher’s teaching certificate; * * * «* * * * * j Grounds for revocation…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 342.175(2) — 2 cases
Finney v. Bransom, 924 P.2d 319 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
“175(2), which requires revocation of a teacher's license upon conviction of any one of a number of sexual offences, supports the majority's conclusion that, as a matter of law, Bransom's alleged misconduct could not have been within the course and scope of his employment. [2]…”
Cooper v. Eugene Sch. Dist. No. 4J, 708 P.2d 1161 (Or. Ct. App. 1985).
“Conviction of other crimes, including drug-related crimes, gross unfitness and gross neglect of duty may subject a teacher to state-wide discipline, but the sanction may be as little as a public reprimand.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 342.175(4)(a) — 1 case
Robin v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 421 P.3d 385 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
“121 ("The Teacher Standards and Practices Commission shall issue licenses to teachers and administrators who possess the minimum competencies, knowledge and skills to teach and administer in the public schools of this state.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 342.175(5) — 3 cases
Reguero v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 822 P.2d 1171 (Or. 1991).
“" OAR 584-20-040(2) provided: "The Commission may initiate proceedings to suspend or revoke the [license] of an educator under ORS 342.175 or deny a [license] to an applicant under ORS 342.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 342.175(6) — 2 cases
Talbott v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 317 P.3d 347 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
“On review of the ALJ’s proposed order, the TSPC determined that respondent had engaged in four instances of gross neglect of duty in violation of OAR 584-020-0040(4) and ORS 342.175 by giving false answers to two questions on an employment application and leaving an offensive…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 342.175(l)(b) — 5 cases
Reguero v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 822 P.2d 1171 (Or. 1991).
“" OAR 584-20-040(2) provided: "The Commission may initiate proceedings to suspend or revoke the [license] of an educator under ORS 342.175 or deny a [license] to an applicant under ORS 342.”
Osuna-Bonilla v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 386 P.3d 229 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
“In September 2012, the TSPC issued a notice accusing petitioner of gross neglect of duty in violation of ORS 342.175(l)(b) and violations of related administrative rules, noted below, all involving the accusations of the complaining students.”
Talbott v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 317 P.3d 347 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
“On review of the ALJ’s proposed order, the TSPC determined that respondent had engaged in four instances of gross neglect of duty in violation of OAR 584-020-0040(4) and ORS 342.175 by giving false answers to two questions on an employment application and leaving an offensive…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 342.175(l)(c) — 5 cases
Ross v. Springfield Sch. Dist. No. 19, 657 P.2d 188 (Or. 1982).
“The statute lists eight grounds for dismissal and incorporates the grounds upon which a teaching certificate may be revoked set forth in ORS 342.175. It begins "No permanent teacher shall be dismissed except for * * *.”
Reguero v. Teacher Standards & Practices Comm'n, 822 P.2d 1171 (Or. 1991).
“" OAR 584-20-040(2) provided: "The Commission may initiate proceedings to suspend or revoke the [license] of an educator under ORS 342.175 or deny a [license] to an applicant under ORS 342.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 342.175(l)(e) — 1 case
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.