A. The school board shall retain its exclusive final authority over matters concerning employment and supervision of its personnel, including dismissals and suspensions.
B. In the case of a hearing before the school board, the school board shall give the teacher its written decision as soon as practicable but in no case more than 30 days after the hearing.
C. In the case of a hearing before a hearing officer appointed by the school board or a three-member fact-finding panel, the school board shall give the teacher its written decision as soon as practicable but in no case more than 30 days after receiving the record or recording of the hearing; however, should there be a further hearing before the school board, such decision shall be furnished the teacher as soon as practicable but in no case more than 30 days after such further hearing.
D. A teacher may be dismissed or suspended by a majority of a quorum of the school board.
E. The school board's attorney, assistants, or representative, if he or they represented a participant in the prior proceedings, the grievant, the grievant's attorney or representative, and notwithstanding the provisions of § 22.1-69, the superintendent shall be excluded from any executive session of the school board which has as its purpose reaching a decision on a grievance. However, immediately after a decision has been made and publicly announced, as in favor of or not in favor of the grievant, the school board's attorney or representative and the superintendent may join the school board in executive session to assist in the writing of the decision.
F. In those instances when licensed personnel are dismissed or resign due to a conviction of any felony, any offense involving the sexual molestation, physical or sexual abuse or rape of a child, any offense involving drugs, or due to having become the subject of a founded case of child abuse or neglect, the local school board shall notify the Board of Education within 10 business days of such dismissal or the acceptance of such resignation.
Code 1950, § 22-217.8; 1968, c. 691; 1974, c. 18; 1979, c. 298; 1980, c. 559; 1983, c. 327; 1992, c. 679; 2003, c. 187; 2008, cc. 474, 827; 2013, cc. 588, 650; 2020, c. 875.
Notes of Decisions
Russell Cnty. Sch. Bd. v. Anderson, 384 S.E.2d 598 (Va. 1989).
· cites it 12× “Code § 22.1-313 concerns decisions by school boards following hearings before fact-finding panels.”
Lee v. Albemarle Cnty. Sch. Bd., 648 F. Supp. 744 (W.D. Va. 1986).
· cites it 7× “Under Code § 22.1-313(0), an employee may be dismissed by a majority of a quorum of the school board.”
Dennis v. Cnty. Sch. Bd. of Rappahannock Co., 582 F. Supp. 536 (W.D. Va. 1984).
· cites it 3× “What that statute appears to contemplate for the superintendent is a role in the screening of all applicants to ensure that everyone considered by the school board possesses suitable qualifications and moral character.”
Marlow v. Chesterfield Cnty. Sch. Bd., 749 F. Supp. 2d 417 (E.D. Va. 2010).
“§ 22.1-313(A). How such a scenario “plays out” in an employment context is, however, an issue for the factfinder’s resolution, and the School Board may, at trial, present evidence demonstrating the limitations of the Superintendent’s authority, if such evidence exists.”
Rasnick v. Dickenson Cnty. Sch. Bd., 333 F. Supp. 2d 560 (W.D. Va. 2004).
“§ 22.1-313(A) (Michie 2003). However, the superintendent may recommend dismissal or probation, see id.”
Williams v. Charlottesville Sch. Bd., 940 F. Supp. 143 (W.D. Va. 1996).
· cites it 2× “” Va.Code Ann. § 22.1-313. Classification of employment status for teachers is governed by § 22.”
McKay v. Clarke Cnty. Sch. Bd., 10 Va. Cir. 339 (Clarke Cir. Ct. 1987).
· cites it 2× “The limitation of judicial intervention to these two particular instances serves to confirm and reinforce the express statutory language of § 22.1-313 above that the school board is the final authority on substantive matters in grievances involving dismissal of teachers.”
In re Grievance of Birch, 18 Va. Cir. 282 (Colonial Heights Cir. Ct. 1989).
· cites it 4× “In support of this, grievant cites the Court to Virginia Code § 22.1-313 which states that the School Board had "exclusive final authority over matters concerning employment and supervision.”
Denzler v. Henrico Cnty. Sch. Bd., 27 Va. Cir. 486 (Henrico Cir. Ct. 1984).
· cites it 3× “” Section 22.1-313 is a statutory implementation of this provision and provides that “The school board shall retain its exclusive final authority over matters concerning employment and supervision of its personnel, including dismissals, suspensions and placing on probation.”
Riddick v. Portsmouth Sch. Bd (4th Cir. 2000).
· cites it 2× “Pursuant to Va. Code Ann. § 22.1-313 (A) (Michie 1999), the Board retains exclusive final authority over matters con- cerning the discipline of school employees.”
Luckett v. City of Harrisonburg Sch. Bd., 14 Va. Cir. 76 (Rockingham Cir. Ct. 1988).
· cites it 2× “The Virginia statutes cited above are very precise with respect to School Boards’ final authority over personnel matters (§ 22.1-313), reduction in number of teachers regardless of continuing contract status for decrease in enrollment (§ 22.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 22.1-313(0) — 1 case
Lee v. Albemarle Cnty. Sch. Bd., 648 F. Supp. 744 (W.D. Va. 1986).
“Under Code § 22.1-313(0), an employee may be dismissed by a majority of a quorum of the school board.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 22.1-313(A) — 5 cases
Marlow v. Chesterfield Cnty. Sch. Bd., 749 F. Supp. 2d 417 (E.D. Va. 2010).
“§ 22.1-313(A). How such a scenario “plays out” in an employment context is, however, an issue for the factfinder’s resolution, and the School Board may, at trial, present evidence demonstrating the limitations of the Superintendent’s authority, if such evidence exists.”
Rasnick v. Dickenson Cnty. Sch. Bd., 333 F. Supp. 2d 560 (W.D. Va. 2004).
“§ 22.1-313(A) (Michie 2003). However, the superintendent may recommend dismissal or probation, see id.”
McKay v. Clarke Cnty. Sch. Bd., 10 Va. Cir. 339 (Clarke Cir. Ct. 1987).
“The limitation of judicial intervention to these two particular instances serves to confirm and reinforce the express statutory language of § 22.1-313 above that the school board is the final authority on substantive matters in grievances involving dismissal of teachers.”
Luckett v. City of Harrisonburg Sch. Bd., 14 Va. Cir. 76 (Rockingham Cir. Ct. 1988).
“The Virginia statutes cited above are very precise with respect to School Boards’ final authority over personnel matters (§ 22.1-313), reduction in number of teachers regardless of continuing contract status for decrease in enrollment (§ 22.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 22.1-313(B) — 1 case
— Va. Code Ann. § 22.1-313(C) — 1 case
— Va. Code Ann. § 22.1-313(D) — 1 case
Lee v. Albemarle Cnty. Sch. Bd., 648 F. Supp. 744 (W.D. Va. 1986).
“Under Code § 22.1-313(0), an employee may be dismissed by a majority of a quorum of the school board.”
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.