SPS To Pay Out to Teacher Over Health Issues at Hale

From the Times (and thanks to a reader tip!):

A former Seattle teacher has reached a $750,000 settlement from the public-school district that fired her seven years ago for not returning to work in a school building she said was harmful to her health.

The teacher, 14-year drama and language instructor Denise Frisino, sued Seattle Public Schools after the district fired her from Nathan Hale High School in 2005, according to court documents.

 The lawsuit was initially thrown out by a King County judge, but an appeals court overturned that decision and the two parties settled on the eve of a scheduled new trial this fall. The settlement, finalized this week, did not constitute an admission of guilt, according to attorneys on both sides.

What to think?

Well, I know there were definitely mold issues at Hale and these were documented and affected students as well.

Sometimes I wish the district would know when to fight and when to not fight.  The lawyers fees on this case are probably huge and now there $750K out the door.  (I don't know; is there insurance coverage for this?)

Comments

Catherine said…
I believe SPS is self insured for all incidents under $1million, then their insurance policy kicks in.
12/21/12, 12:10 PM
Juana said…
One can only wish that the district might see potentially similar complaints from Arbor Heights staff and students, and would place that school at the top of the list for renovation/ repair/whatever is needed.
12/21/12, 1:07 PM
Joyce said…
I know what I think. The "disability" caused by the mold didn't prevent her from working as a real estate agent, traveling all over the world (including Europe, twice) and writing a book! She even had the strength to argue in court with her neighbor over a boundary dispute! Anyone who really knows her will tell you that this is about getting attention for herself! It's pitiful- as the money is desperately needed in the district!
12/26/12, 3:18 PM
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
12/26/12, 10:39 PM
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
12/27/12, 1:01 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

The speaker list is up for the Board meeting tomorrow; not as packed as I thought with just four people on the waitlist. The majority of the speakers are speaking on high school boundaries (with several wanting to talk about Ballard High). There are only three of us speaking about the Green Dot resolution asking the City to not grant the zoning departures that Green Dot has requested.  It's me, long-time watchdog, Chris Jackins, and the head of the Washington State Charter Schools Association, Patrick D'Amelio.  (I knew Mr. D'Amelio when he headed the Alliance for Education and Big Brothers and Big Sisters; he's a stand-up guy.)
Read more

Breaking It Down: Where the District Might Close Schools

Update 2: an absolutely fabulous interactive map made by parent Beth Day (@thebethocracy on Twitter - she covers Board meetings and is fun to read).   end of update    Update 1: Mea culpa, I did indeed get Decatur and Thornton Creek mixed up. Thanks to all for the correction. end of update   I suspect some who read this post will be irate. Why do this? Because the district seems very hellbent on this effort with no oversight skid marks from the Board.    To clearly state - I do not believe that closing 20 schools is a good idea. I think they hit on 20 because they thought it might bring in the most savings. But the jury is still out on the savings because the district has not shown its work nor its data. I suspect closing schools and THEN leasing/renting them is the big plan but that means the district really has to keep the buildings up.   But this district, with its happy talk about "well-resourced schools" is NOT acknowledging the pain and yes, grief, that is to come fro
Read more

MEETING CANCELED - Hey Kids, A Meeting with Three(!) Seattle Schools Board Directors

 Update 2: So I have seen a message from President Liza Rankin on why she, Director Evan Briggs, and Director Michelle Sarju backed out of this meeting.  In a nutshell: - She says there was no organization to the meeting which is just not true. They had a moderator lined up and naturally the board members could have set parameters for what to discuss, length of meeting, etc. All that was fleshed out. - She also claimed that if the meeting was PTA sponsored, they needed to have liability insurance to use the school space. Hello? PTAs use school space all the time and know they have to have this insurance.  - She seems to be worried about the Open Public Meetings law. Look, if she has a meeting in a school building on a non-personnel topic, it should be an open meeting. It appears that Rankin is trying, over and over, to narrow the window of access that parents have to Board members. She even says in her message - "...with decisions made in public." Hmmm - She also says that th
Read more