dragonas

(Mass. App. Ct., 2005)
 * Dragonas v. School Committee of Melrose**

D (School Committee of Melrose) released the plaintiff from her duties as Lead Teacher of Foreign Language for poor work performance and lack of needed skills P (Long time Teacher P. Dragonas) challenged the school committee’s decision and is suing for age discrimination and defamation
 * __Facts:__**


 * __Issues/Answers:__**
 * 1) Does the plaintiff have enough evidence for an age discrimination case to move forward to a jury trial? **//Yes//**
 * 2) Does speaking to a group of parents about a teacher in a negative way question whether or not the principal acted in “malice and abused his privilege? **//Yes//**


 * __Basis/Rationale:__**
 * Legal Basis**-Mass Gen. Law 151 B, Section 4 and other precedents; enough evidence to warrant a jury trial.


 * Rationale-** Summary judgment was not appropriate due to the facts of what and how information was articulated to parents and the plaintiff established a “prima facie” case in regards to age discrimination.


 * __Notes:__**
 * 1) Dragonas was Lead Foreign Language Teacher for 1998-1999 and also coordinator of the German student exchange program and was involved with this program for 25 years. She had been a teacher in the system since 1971.
 * 2) P met with Principal Burke in December of 1999 where he addressed concerns, one being that she left an ill student unattended during the last visit to Germany. He had overall concerns about her continuing to coordinate the German exchange program which had a scheduled trip in April 2000. Also told the P that the Lead Teacher position was being abolished for the following school year.
 * 3) Lead Teacher position was never abolished and the job was posted and interviewed for by three candidates, one being the P. Position was filled with a colleague of the P who was 24 years younger and had more technological experience.
 * 4) Principal called an “emergency” meeting with parents of the German exchange program and did not invite the P. Told parents about her alleged issue of the ill student during the last visit. Principal made many disparaging remarks about the P such as that she accused the Principal of sexual harassment and she was type that would “rip your face off.” Parents still wanted her to coordinate the trip because of her experience.
 * 5) Defendants asked for a Summary Judgment and it was granted on September 25, 2003.
 * 6) Appeal was filed and the outcome is outlined above.