Court of Special Appeals revives fired professor’s suit against UMUC

Listen to this article

A fired accounting professor will have another chance to bring his $3.5 million wrongful termination claim against University of Maryland University College in state court.

The Court of Special Appeals’ decision reversed a judge’s ruling that Edward C. McReady failed to file necessary documents on time.

The appellate court’s decision permits McReady, who is also a licensed attorney, to pursue his claim under the Maryland Whistleblower Law in Montgomery County Circuit Court.

McReady, 69, claims he was fired for objecting to the school’s hiring of an inexperienced teacher. UMUC counters the firing was justifiably based on McReady’s refusal to accept a teaching reassignment and disrespect toward supervisors.

McReady also filed a federal lawsuit, alleging a First Amendment violation, which UMUC won on a summary judgment motion last March.

Last week’s Court of Special Appeals’ decision, following the setback in U.S. District Court, has “encouraged” McReady to proceed, he said.

“Now I can go back and have the court look at some of the motions that I lost,” added McReady, a Washington, D.C., lawyer who represented himself in state and federal court.

“I can’t afford it,” McReady said in explaining why he is pressing his own case. “I really don’t think an attorney is as dedicated to this as I am. I’ve lived with it for five years now.”

In the state court action, Judge Mary Beth McCormick ruled in January 2011 that McReady had failed to satisfy a procedural requirement that all records from administrative hearings — including testimony transcripts — be presented to the circuit court within 60 days or judicial review is waived.

McCormick dismissed the case because a transcript of the testimony had not been presented to the court.

On appeal, McReady argued he was not obligated to provide a transcript because no witnesses were called — and thus no testimony was given — during the administrative hearing. Rather, the hearing consisted of argument given solely by attorneys for the two sides, which is not testimony, he added.

The Court of Special Appeals agreed.

Testimony “cannot reasonably be read to mean arguments of counsel or proceedings on the record that do not constitute oral evidence given by witnesses,” Judge Deborah S. Eyler wrote for the court. “‘Testimony’ plainly means oral sworn evidence given by a witness and cannot reasonably be read to mean arguments of counsel (or of unsworn pro se litigants).”

David R. Paulson, a spokesman for Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler, said, the decision “remains under review and the attorneys are determining whether to appeal.”

The instances that led to McReady’s firing included his refusal to accept an assignment in May 2007 to chair the intermediate accounting courses and his repeated objections to a reassignment that had him teaching an online course instead of one offered in class, UMUC said in court papers.

His supervisor, Rhea Reed, said the reassignment was necessary so she could place a new faculty member, who had not been trained in online teaching, in a classroom. But McReady said the new teacher was unqualified to teach the accounting course. He voiced his objection to the department head, who defended Reed’s decision.

In June 2007, McReady was told his contract would not be renewed when it expired in June 2008. The announcement came after McReady exhibited what the department head called his “discourteous, disrespectful and abusive” behavior in demanding that a late-registered student be removed from his class “immediately,” UMUC said.

When McReady continued to complain about teaching the online course, he was fired on Aug. 24, 2007, for willful neglect of duties and insubordination, UMUC added.

McReady filed an administrative grievance, saying he was illegally terminated for having expressed his objections to academic and job-related actions.

The grievance committee upheld the termination, as did the Department of Budget and Management and the Office of Administrative Hearings, on Oct. 22, 2008.

McReady filed for judicial review in Montgomery County Circuit Court on Nov. 17, 2008.

Federal appeal

In the separate federal action, McReady said he was particularly disturbed by U.S. District Judge Roger W. Titus’ tone in the memorandum opinion accompanying the summary judgment order.

“I think anyone who reads that opinion would say, ‘McReady’s an ass,’” he said.

Titus gave McReady a judicial dressing down for what the judge characterized as a meritless claim that the firing violated the First Amendment.

“In the final analysis, this case has nothing to do with freedom of speech or academic freedom,” Titus wrote. “Rather it is a routine case of nonrenewal and termination of a clearly insubordinate employee who simply refused to comply with the directives of UMUC’s administration, and to conform his conduct with curricular decisions they made.”

McReady said he has appealed that ruling to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

WHAT THE COURT HELD

Case:

Edward C. McReady v. University System of Maryland, CSA Nos. 1668, 1669 and 1670. Sept. Term 2010. Reported. Opinion by Eyler, D., J. Submitted on briefs. Filed Feb. 9, 2012.

Issue:

Did the trial judge err in denying judicial review of an administrative decision because testimony transcript had not been received within 60 days?

Holding:

Yes; “testimony” was never taken as only the attorneys testified.

Counsel:

Edward C. McReady pro se; Thomas Faulk for appellee.

RecordFax # 12-0209-02