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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  2. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  3. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

  4. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  5. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

ADVERTISEMENT