Patricia Terkosky vs. Indiana Department of Education - 9/17/13

Back to TopPrintE-mail
Tuesday  September 17, 2013 
1:00 PM  EST

1 p.m., 49A02-1212-PL-1000. Terkosky was employed by a Special Education Cooperative as a special needs teacher for 23 years, and most recently had been working at Worthington Elementary School as a special education teacher.  In March 2010, the Superintendent of Public Instruction initiated procedures to “revoke” Terkosky’s teaching license for “immorality” and “misconduct in office.”  The revocation procedures stemmed from four separate incidents involving Terkosky and various students, including: (1) having a student stand between an easel and the chalkboard, repeatedly striking the easel with a yardstick, and subsequently draping a plastic cover over the head and neck of the student; (2) slapping a child in the face and causing the child to cry; (3) grabbing a child’s arm possibly resulting in bruising and sitting her down roughly in a chair; and (4) “popping” a student in the mouth because the student called her a “meanie” and forcing that child to ride the second bus home from school that day.  An ALJ issued an order suspending Terkosky’s teaching license for two years which was affirmed by the trial court. The Scheduled Panel Members are Judges Baker, Bradford, and, Brown. Location: Franklin College, 101 Branigin Blvd., Franklin, Indiana 46131   

Back to Events
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  2. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  3. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  4. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  5. I totally agree with John Smith.

ADVERTISEMENT