As we've reported, Dusman's attorney, J. McDowell Sharpe of Sharpe & Sharpe LLP said the court agreed with Dusman’s argument stating that her 2004 contract, which was set to automatically renew in July 2016, was in effect during the time she was let go last March.
Therefore, Dusman was denied the 150-day notice that should have been given to her, if her contract wasn’t being renewed.According to court documents CASD's appeal states, "Ms. Dusman's amended complaint alleges that either the 2008 contract or the 2009 Written Contract were controlling.. She has alleged that CASA violated the contracts and by failing to giver her proper notice when it eliminated her position. Therefore, Ms. Dusman has alleged that either of the two contracts were renewed by statute, and she is entitled to reinstatement to her position. CASD's demurrer [objection] is based upon the fact that they do not believe the 2009 Written Contract ever existed. Further, they believed that the 2009 Resolution was in effect at the time that they eliminated the position. Therefore, CASD's belief is that since the 2009 Resolution is controlling, that Ms. Dusman has not identified a clear right."
Copyright 2016 Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.