Linn County Circuit Judge Carol Bispham found in a Nov. 27 opinion that a temporary restraining order should be filed against Nan Seiber to prevent her from releasing further confidential School District 55 information or documents relating to a former teacher.
Judge Bispham said that the School District should submit an order for the court’s signature within the next three weeks.
Following an Aug. 29 hearing, Judge Bispham found that Seiber had disclosed a copy of a resignation agreement with the former employee.
Seiber had sent the document to the Teachers Standards and Practices Commission with a complaint about Supt. Bill Hampton.
“Ms. Seiber further testified that she doesn’t want to disclose any confidential information prior to trial and she does not have any confidential information,” Judge Bispham said. “She sent what she had to the Teachers Standards and Practices Commission.
“This is a case in which a temporary restraining order against Ms. Seiber will prevent her from disclosing alleged confidential information contained in the resignation agreement regarding a former employee during the pendency of this matter.
“If plaintiff’s (School District 55) is granted, the burden or harm to the defendant (Seiber) will be little or will have no effect upon Ms. Seiber in light of her own testimony. However if this information is disclosed, a later injunction against disclosure of the same information would be ineffectual. Disclosure would expose the plaintiff to a potential lawsuit.”
In a Sept. 24 request and a Nov. 26 motion , Seiber requested that the district produce the documents that are subject to district’s complaint. Seiber had testified that she did keep a copy of the resignation agreement, which were later collected from board members and destroyed.
The district claims there was additional information mailed with that agreement.
“Defendant Seiber would simply like to know what she is alleged to have retained,” the motion said. “Such material is relevant as it may not be confidential, may be subject to mandatory disclosure laws or may not exist.”
In the request, Seiber requested all documents referenced in the district’s complaint, including all documents mailed to school board members and referencing the resignation agreement. The district objected to the request because “it is not likely to lead to any information relevant to this dispute,” is obliged by law to keep the requested information confidential and that obligation is a substantial basis for the lawsuit.