Del Mar: McClain lawsuit against school district moves forward

By Marsha Sutton
Staff Writer

The case of former Del Mar Union School District superintendent Sharon McClain, who was hired in September 2008 and released March 31, 2010, vs. the DMUSD is moving along, with a hearing heard May 6 and one coming up May 20.

Marsha Sutton

The hearing on May 20, filed by McClain’s attorney, Los Angeles-based Dale Gronemeier, is a summary adjudication to ask the court to rule on the issue of termination notice.

“It seeks to determine that Dr. McClain was not given proper notice of the termination meeting on March 31, 2010,” Gronemeier said. “The basic fact is she was given notice of that meeting on March 29. The contract in our view requires that she be notified at least 30 days in advance.”

Calling it a “no downside motion” other than the $750 filing fee, Gronemeier said, “If you lose, it doesn’t mean anything except that there may be factual disputes and you have to go to trial on it.”

If the judge rules in McClain’s favor, he said it means that “it is determined that they didn’t give the proper notice.”

But Ryan Church, an attorney with the law firm of Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz, disagreed.

“In her motion, she’s saying that the district had a contractual obligation to give notice, and they did not give notice,” said Church, who is working with the school district’s legal counsel Daniel Shinoff on the case. “The court cannot rule on whether or not the district did or did not give the proper notice because that’s a jury decision.”

The school district’s attorneys are opposing the motion and are making a distinction on what the judge can and cannot decide. Church said the court can only decide whether or not that obligation exists, and cannot determine whether or not the district breached any contractual obligation.

“Our position is that the plaintiff is asking the court to do something they cannot do. That’s an issue for the jury to decide,” Church said. “Our position is the court can only determine whether or not a duty exists.”

A hearing held May 6 ruled on a motion for judgment filed by the district’s attorneys that attacked four different causes of action. “The judge agreed with us on one of them, and the other three will remain intact,” Church said.

Both attorneys said many of these motions are minor. “Pleading disputes aren’t very interesting,” Gronemeier said.
A motion with larger implications will be heard by the court July 8, which was filed after Gronemeier subpoenaed former DMUSD school board member Steven McDowell for a deposition.

“We filed a motion to quash that subpoena,” said Church, explaining that the deliberative process privilege prevents public board members from being deposed and bars judicial inquiry into the motives of public officials.

“You’re not supposed to be able to take board members’ depositions,” he said. “That’s been a law for quite some time. The voters can question their decisions, but the court shouldn’t be able to go in there and question their decisions.”

“They filed a motion to quash the subpoena on the grounds that you cannot require the testimony of any board member,” Gronemeier said. “But the only people who know anything about this case on the district’s side are board members.”

Gronemeier said the district’s attorneys don’t want McDowell to testify, and he expects they’ll take that same position with the other board members.

“What they’re saying is [that] we cannot take any discovery because the only people that know anything about all the disputed events in the lawsuit are board members,” Gronemeier said. “They have blocked, temporarily at least, our ability to get any information essentially, and we’re heading to court resolution on that.”

“When you represent public entities, you will occasionally run into a situation where someone will try to depose a board member, and this is a common motion you file to prevent that from happening,” Church said.

When asked why McDowell was subpoenaed to testify, of the five board members, Gronemeier said, “It was a tactical decision that he was the best place to start.”
Gronemeier said he also had four motions to compel discovery that haven’t been filed yet, for July 15.

More motions and hearings are expected by both sides, in preparation for the full trial which has been set for Nov. 4.

Related posts:

  1. Del Mar: McClain case against school district moves forward
  2. McClain case against Del Mar school district moves forward
  3. Former superintendent files suit against Del Mar school district
  4. EDUCATION MATTERS: McClain’s lawsuit and the election
  5. Attorneys for former Superintendent McClain send letter to school board

Short URL:

Posted by Staff on May 12, 2011. Filed under Columns, Editorial Columns, Education Matters. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry

1 Comment for “Del Mar: McClain lawsuit against school district moves forward”

  1. On April 15, 2010 a Del Mar Times story quoted the school district's representative saying about McClain, "If she chooses to go public with her lawsuit, then it's all on the table." But it sounds like the school district doesn't want to put in all on the table. In order for justice to prevail, Steven McDowell should show up for his deposition. How are the voters going to know whom to vote for if they don't know whether or not illegal actions took place behind closed doors?

Leave a Reply



Bottom Buttons 1

Bottom Buttons 2

Bottom Buttons 3

Bottom Buttons 4

Bottom Buttons 5

Bottom Buttons 6





  • RSF Association Board Biz: It’s fire season: Be prepared
    The Rancho Santa Fe Fire Protection District (RSFFPD) was officially formed in 1946, in the aftermath of a devastating fire that took place in 1943 and destroyed brush, farmland and homes from Rancho Bernardo through Rancho Santa Fe, all the way to Solana Beach and Del Mar. Today the Fire District spans 38 square miles and protects nearly 30,000 residents. W […]
  • Rancho Santa Fe couple lead way in helping those with thyroid disorders
    Few people may know that Graves’ disease is one of the most common autoimmune diseases afflicting Americans today. Fewer still may know that the only national non-profit dedicated to its patients is headquartered in Rancho Santa Fe. The Graves’ Disease and Thyroid Foundation, co-chaired by Rancho Santa Fe residents Kathleen Bell Flynn and Steve Flynn, has be […]
  • Candidates seek election to three Rancho Santa Fe special district boards
    Seats on the boards of directors of three special districts that provide such services as water, fire protection, sewage treatment and landscape maintenance are on the ballot in the Nov. 4 election. The three special districts are the Santa Fe Irrigation District, the Rancho Santa Fe Fire Protection District and the Rancho Santa Fe Community Services Distric […]