Biggert files lawsuit on Board of DD
Lead Summary
By
Brandy Chandler-brandychandler@gmail.com
The former superintendent of the Highland County Board of Developmental Disabilities has filed a lawsuit against the board and Hills and Dales Training Center in Highland County Common Pleas Court, asking for a jury trial, and that he be awarded more than $25,000 in damages.
He also claims that he is “entitled to reinstatement to his position as superintendent for at least one additional year.”
Chuck Biggert’s employment contract was terminated in a 5-0 vote by the board in October following allegations that he bullied and intimidated employees.
Biggert requested a hearing before a referee on his dismissal, saying that it was without cause. Following a two-day hearing in December, in which Board of DD employees, county elected officials, and Biggert testified, referee Monica Bohlen issued a report that found the board’s action to terminate Biggert were justified.
During the hearing, the board was represented by attorney Jim Hughes. Biggert was represented by attorney Samuel Lillard, who is also representing him in the civil suit.
Lillard said during the hearing that the former superintendent had an “exemplary” record, and there was no foundation for his termination.
Employees described Biggert as a “dictator” and a “bully” who would often “belittle” and threaten them with termination. One woman said that during an argument, she feared that Biggert would strike her.
No incidents of actual violence have been alleged.
Biggert’s contract, which he entered into in 2008, was up Dec. 31, 2011.
“In 2011, Mr. Biggert’s conduct deteriorated,” and that his explanation of the events were “not credible,” Bohlen wrote in the report, which was issued Dec. 16.
Bigger alleges in the suit Bohlen’s decision “was not based on sound legal analyses, but on passion and improper character evidence.”
On Jan. 12, the board voted 4-0 to accept Bohlen’s report. Biggert then had 30 days to file a suit in Highland County Common Pleas Court if he objected to the findings.
Biggert filed the suit Feb. 10 in the Highland County Clerk of Court’s Office. He has asked for a trial before a jury.
He alleged the board’s actions were unlawful, that “several of the individual board members were ineligible to vote” and the board did not have a legal quorum to vote on the contract.
Biggert claimed in the suit, and during the December hearing, that the termination was invalid because he did not receive notice of his termination in accordance with the terms of his contract, and that the board proceeded with a pre-disciplinary conference without giving him the chance to be present and respond to allegations, and that the board did not prove that
the termination was for ‘just cause,’ in accordance with the Ohio Revised Code.
Additionally, Biggert said he should not have been terminated because of his good performance reviews and what he accomplished financially.
It is alleged in the suit that the referee’s findings, “do not compare with the weight of the evidence and demonstrate that the referee’s decision was not based on sound legal analyses, but on passion and improper character evidence.”
In addition to the damages that he is asking for, Biggert said the board has refused to pay him accrued but unused sick time, despite repeated requests they do so. Biggert alleges their failure to pay is a breach of contract.
According to the referee’s report, “Mr. Biggert’s conduct that formed the basis of his termination was not a single isolated incident, but rather was a course of conduct over months during 2011.
“Mr. Biggert’s persistence in his course of conduct, even after the decision to reassign him for the balance of his contract year, propelled this into a termination, instead of the reassignment for the rest of his term. He persisted in this conduct.
“Although many of these incidents would have been enough by themselves to warrant a termination, the cumulative effect of all of them solidified the decision of the board to terminate him.”[[In-content Ad]]
He also claims that he is “entitled to reinstatement to his position as superintendent for at least one additional year.”
Chuck Biggert’s employment contract was terminated in a 5-0 vote by the board in October following allegations that he bullied and intimidated employees.
Biggert requested a hearing before a referee on his dismissal, saying that it was without cause. Following a two-day hearing in December, in which Board of DD employees, county elected officials, and Biggert testified, referee Monica Bohlen issued a report that found the board’s action to terminate Biggert were justified.
During the hearing, the board was represented by attorney Jim Hughes. Biggert was represented by attorney Samuel Lillard, who is also representing him in the civil suit.
Lillard said during the hearing that the former superintendent had an “exemplary” record, and there was no foundation for his termination.
Employees described Biggert as a “dictator” and a “bully” who would often “belittle” and threaten them with termination. One woman said that during an argument, she feared that Biggert would strike her.
No incidents of actual violence have been alleged.
Biggert’s contract, which he entered into in 2008, was up Dec. 31, 2011.
“In 2011, Mr. Biggert’s conduct deteriorated,” and that his explanation of the events were “not credible,” Bohlen wrote in the report, which was issued Dec. 16.
Bigger alleges in the suit Bohlen’s decision “was not based on sound legal analyses, but on passion and improper character evidence.”
On Jan. 12, the board voted 4-0 to accept Bohlen’s report. Biggert then had 30 days to file a suit in Highland County Common Pleas Court if he objected to the findings.
Biggert filed the suit Feb. 10 in the Highland County Clerk of Court’s Office. He has asked for a trial before a jury.
He alleged the board’s actions were unlawful, that “several of the individual board members were ineligible to vote” and the board did not have a legal quorum to vote on the contract.
Biggert claimed in the suit, and during the December hearing, that the termination was invalid because he did not receive notice of his termination in accordance with the terms of his contract, and that the board proceeded with a pre-disciplinary conference without giving him the chance to be present and respond to allegations, and that the board did not prove that
the termination was for ‘just cause,’ in accordance with the Ohio Revised Code.
Additionally, Biggert said he should not have been terminated because of his good performance reviews and what he accomplished financially.
It is alleged in the suit that the referee’s findings, “do not compare with the weight of the evidence and demonstrate that the referee’s decision was not based on sound legal analyses, but on passion and improper character evidence.”
In addition to the damages that he is asking for, Biggert said the board has refused to pay him accrued but unused sick time, despite repeated requests they do so. Biggert alleges their failure to pay is a breach of contract.
According to the referee’s report, “Mr. Biggert’s conduct that formed the basis of his termination was not a single isolated incident, but rather was a course of conduct over months during 2011.
“Mr. Biggert’s persistence in his course of conduct, even after the decision to reassign him for the balance of his contract year, propelled this into a termination, instead of the reassignment for the rest of his term. He persisted in this conduct.
“Although many of these incidents would have been enough by themselves to warrant a termination, the cumulative effect of all of them solidified the decision of the board to terminate him.”[[In-content Ad]]