Preview:

No. 42, September Term, 2000 Glenn Reichardt, et al. v. Christopher A. Flynn

[Whether An Ab solute Privileg e Defen se Applie s To A D efamation Action In volving Communications Made By Students And Parents To Public School Authorities About The Perceived Misconduct Of A Public School Teacher And Coach]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND

No. 42 September Term, 2000 _________________________________________

GLENN REICHARDT, et al.

v.

CHRISTOPHER A. FLYNN

__________________________________________

Bell, C.J. Eldridge Raker Wilner Cathell Harrell Rod ows ky, Lawrence F. (Retired, Specially Assigned), JJ. __________________________________________

Opinion by Eldridge, J. Cathell, J., Dissents. __________________________________________

Filed: May 8, 2003

W e granted a petition for a writ of certiorari in this case to determine whether an absolute privilege defense applies to a defamation action involving communications made by students and parents to public school authorities about the perceived misconduct of a public school teacher and coach. I. Christopher A. Flynn was employed in the Montgom ery County public school system as a teacher since 1989 and as a high school track and cross-country coach from 1990 to 1998. From the 1994 school year, until the time of the petitioners' allegations, Flynn was Walt Whitman High School's only co-educational cross-country track team coach. Petitioners, Joanna Zuercher and Claire White-Crane, joined the cross-country track team as high school freshmen in 1995. About 2 years later, on January 12, 1998, both students and their parents met with Walt Whitman High School Principal, Dr. Jerome Marco, to express their concerns regarding Flynn's behavior as a coach. According to the girls, their primary concerns related to alleged improper sexual comme nts made by Flynn and their perceptio n that Flynn was more interested in coaching the male runners than the female runners. The girls alleged that Flynn's conduct appeared contrary to the school system's written policies (titled: "Nond iscrimination ;" "Gender Equity;" and "Sexual Harassment") which promised

-2gender equity and an environment free from discrimination and sexual harassme nt. Joanna and Claire also wrote to other officials of the Montgom ery County public school system about Flynn's alleged miscond uct. 1 That same afternoon, Dr. Marco met with Flynn and informed him of the allegations, which Flynn denied. Later that evening, Dr. Marco decided to place Flynn on leave with pay from both his teaching and coaching positions beginning the next day. Two days later, on January 15, 1998, Flynn was formally suspended with pay by the Montgom ery County Superintendent of Schools, Paul Vance, while the school system's Department of Personnel Services conducted a confidential investigation. Flynn remained suspended until May 11, 1998, when he was placed in a non-teaching position. During the investigation, the school system personnel interviewed and received written statements regarding Flynn's conduct from more than 20 students. Flynn was able to obtain these statements from the school system's personnel during its investigation. In addition, Flynn and his counsel were given the opportun ity to respond to all statements submitted during the investigatio n. Neit her Flynn nor his counsel chose to do so. In reporting their concerns to Dr. Marco and other officials, the petitioners asserted that they were acting in conformity with the school system's "Sexual Harassment" policy which encourages students to report questionable conduct to the principal. See Regulation "Sexual Harassment,"

Download Reichardt v. Flynn.pdf

Maryland Law