• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
Download
 
REL: 05/29/09Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advancesheets of
Southern Reporter
. Readers are requested to notify the
Reporter of Decisions
,Alabama Appellate Courts, 300 Dexter Avenue, Montgomery, Alabama 36104-3741 ((334)229-0649), of any typographical or other errors, in order that corrections may be madebefore the opinion is printed in
Southern Reporter
.
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA 
OCTOBER TERM, 2008-2009 _________________________ 1080179 _________________________ Ex parte James SoleynPETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARITO THE COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS(In re: Bishop State Community Collegev.James Soleyn)(Case No. FMCS: 08-1166;Court of Civil Appeals, 2070670) _________________________ 1080195 _________________________ 
 
2
Ex parte Angelo ArchiblePETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARITO THE COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS(In re: Bishop State Community Collegev. Angelo Archible)(Case No. FMCS: 07-04797;Court of Civil Appeals, 2070379)
WOODALL, Justice.James Soleyn and Angelo Archible each sought certiorarireview of the decision of the Court of Civil Appeals inappeals by Bishop State Community College ("Bishop State"),which the Court of Civil Appeals consolidated. Bishop StateCmty. Coll. v. Archible, [Ms. 2070379, October 24, 2008] __So. 3d __ (Ala. Civ. App. 2008). We granted certiorari reviewto consider two material questions of first impression forthis Court: Whether the Court of Civil Appeals applied theproper standard of review and whether, in reviewing a noticeof termination under the Fair Dismissal Act, it is appropriateto consider the circumstances surrounding the notice. SeeRule 39(a)(1)(C), Ala. R. App. P. We consolidated the casesfor the purpose of writing one opinion. We reverse andremand.
 
1080179,10801953The Court of Civil Appeals' opinion contains detailedstatements of the facts of each underlying case. We will notrepeat all those facts, many of which are not relevant to thelegal questions before us. Instead, we will focus on therelevant procedural history of these cases.Soleyn and Archible are employees of Bishop State who,because of their employment status, have certain rights underthe Fair Dismissal Act, § 36-26-100 et seq., Ala. Code 1975("the Act"). Their employment may be terminated only for oneor more of the reasons listed in § 36-26-102. In order toterminate an employee who is subject to the Act, the employer,here Bishop State, must first give the employee written noticeof its intent to terminate his or her employment. In relevantpart, the notice of intent to terminate must "state thereasons for the proposed termination [and must] contain ashort and plain statement of the facts showing that thetermination is taken for one or more of the reasons listed inSection 36-26-102 ...." § 36-26-103(a).On August 1, 2007, Bishop State issued notices of itsintent to terminate the employment and pay of Archible andSoleyn. Both employees contested the terminations, and each
of 00

Commenting has been disabled.