A Ranburne man has filed a lawsuit against the principal of Ranburne High School, Cleburne County’s school board, a former superintendent, the current superintendent and the state superintendent of education over an alleged affair between the man’s former wife and the principal.

An 11-count complaint was filed by Chris Ledbetter and is son who declared they were “morally indignant and outraged” by the behavior of Ranburne principal Trevor Kribbs over an affair that allegedly occurred in 2008. The lawsuit names former Superintendent of Education Scott Coefield, the present Superintendent of Education David Easley, the members of the Cleburne County Board of Education, Alabama Superintendent of Education Dr. Joe Morton and Kribbs.

Prior to the hearing Judge Street had dismissed Morton from the lawsuit.

A hearing was held Tuesday morning in the Cleburne County Courthouse before Circuit Judge Malcom Street Jr. in which attorneys for the defendants sought to have the complaint dismissed.

After listening to both sides for almost three hours, Judge Street said he would take the matter under advisement and would decide, within 21 days whether to dismiss the case or allow a trial to proceed.

Arguing for the BOE, Coefield and Easley, Birmingham attorney Donald Sweeney said public school officials are entitled to discretionary immunity and cited earlier cases in which similar allegations were raised.

In his statements Sweeney said the BOE must initiate action to terminate a contract principal’s contract and not the court. “The plaintiffs are trying to get the board to act (hold revocation hearings) and that would be inappropriate,” Sweeney said.

Sweeney said that an alleged wife-swapping incident by Kribbs in Atlanta, Georgia in 2006 and alleged infidelity in April and May of 2008 should not be of concern since these incidents were off school property and time.

According to Sweeney the chain of events began in October 2006 when Kribbs allegedly was involved in the wife-swapping incident in Atlanta. This was not known to the BOE he said. And he noted that an affidavit from Kribbs first wife, Kelly, stated to that.

In early 2008 Kribbs divorced and allegedly had an off campus affair with Christy Ledbetter who was not a school employee.

The time to renew Kribbs contract was also at hand and March 26, 2008 was the last date the BOE could have renewed it..

On April 8, 2008 Chris Ledbetter brings complaint to Coefield and seeks to have Kribbs terminated as principal, Sweeney said. Ledbetter alleges Coefield did nothing about the complaint.

“That is a complete lie” said Sweeney. “He (Cofield) took action on two levels. He took the complaint, he decided on an investigation. He talked to the staff at school. He talked to people in the community. He invited Ledbetter to come before the BOE

Sweeney maintained before the court Tuesday that Coefield acted in good faith, took the proper steps, met a second time with Ledbetter and told him he could find no evidence of sexual misconduct at school on school time. “He told Mr. Ledbetter that if he found additional information to bring it to him and we would consider it as a part of the investigation,” Sweeney added.

According to a time line presented by Sweeney:

April 18, 2008 Ledbetter writes a letter of complaint at Coefield’s request.

April – May 2008 Coefield investigates the situation.

May 5, 2008 the BOE asks Kribbs to resign.

May 15, 2008 Krebbs refuses to resign.

June 5, 2008 Coefield reprimands Kribbs in a letter saying that the rumors and allegations of misconduct are not helpful. This, said Sweeney, is evidence that neither the BOE or Coefield took the allegations of Ledbetter indifferently or acted in a malicious manner.

Sweeny said there were no additional complaints made on Kribbs up until Coefield’s term expired.

As for Kribbs contract, Sweeny said contracts are “creatures of the state” and with three-year contracts, the BOE was required to give him a 90 day notice in advance if they were going to fire him. His contract ended at the end of the school year in 2008. “Notice had to be given in March 2008. There was no evidence presented to terminate. Coefield should have brought it before the board in February” Sweeny said, but there was no action and his contract was automatically renewed.

Sweeney also stated that the reason Kribbs got additional salary was because he went from being principal at Ranburne Elementary School to being principal at RHS. Sweeney said there is also a mandated pay schedule made by the Legislature. As for Easley, Sweeney told the court that he took office eight months after the initial complaint was filed and is “a matter he inherited. And Sweeney said the BOE has “no independent authority to make personnel decisions unless recommended by the superintendent.”

Representing Kribbs, attorney Mark Boardman told the court that Kribbs contract was “renewed automatically because the board of education didn’t act.”

In their complaint the plantiffs claim harassment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, immoral conduct and conduct unbecoming a teacher, negligent hiring, promotion and/or retention; negligence in performance of duties or reasonable supervision of employees, negligence in failing to maintain a safe working environment for employees and students, failure to properly enforce its own board policies, failure to prevent the tort of outrageous conduct and the tort of outrageous conduct.

Boardman said there was no evidence of emotional distress and no civil rights violation of the 14th Amendment because there is no constitutional right to an education in Alabama.

“What is done in their private life is not relevant. They do not lose their private life. These allegations are outside public school. You may not approve of his (Kribbs) private life but the law is clear,” Boardman said.

Arguing for the plantiffs, attorney Kenneth Wilson said the defendants conducted a pattern of willfully bad faith and fraudulent efforts to cover up the situation.

“They were aware of their failure to act. They disregarded the risk of harm and were intentionally indifferent,” Wilson said. “The board of education did not investigate. There was not a good faith investigation. Kribbs engaged in immoral conduct and immoral conduct is grounds for dismissal. Easley said he has no proof of inappropriate activity during his term. Easley and the board of education did not do an investigation.”

At that point in the hearing Judge Street asked Wilson to clarify if any of the alleged activity occurred during Easley’s term in office to which Wilson responded that it did not.

“Taking a day (for an affair) and not claiming it is fraud. Coefield has Kribbs pad the paperwork. Coefield is covering it up,” said Wilson. “In April 2008, Kribbs comes to the Ledbetter house and confronts Ledbetter and wants to know why he complained to Coefield. Danny Harris witnessed this harassing incident. How much more proof did Coefield need?” Wilson asked.

As for the BOE vote to dismiss Kribbs, Wilson said, “The board members all said they didn’t want Kribbs in their district. They not only said ‘no’ but ‘hell no’. Not only did he (Coefield) know, he tried to cover up stuff. Immoral conduct is cause of cancellation.”

Wilson added, “Mr. Easley stated to us (he and attorney Jim Berry) that if he had proof (of wife-swapping) he would recommend termination (of Kribbs). He said get him a motel bill or some proof. I think we have proof. They (the BOE) don’t want to hear it. We have no desire to embarrass or humiliate Trevor but because of his own actions he has embarrassed his own self. The defendants have not acted in good faith. The superintendent did all this behind closed doors. I’m not sure if the board of education knew of Kribbs new contract. I’m not sure the board ever knew. Kribbs, Coefield and Easley have all violated standards to claim immunity. Conduct was more than mere negligence. The board knew there were problems. Ledbetter did meet with the board in executive session. They knew the accusations. The board could have called Trevor Kribbs in but they took his word. They did nothing but give a reprimand and a new contract with a 56 percent pay raise. If taxpayers knew what we know they would be outraged.”