## Facts

- Christopher Lehto was an elementary school art teacher in the Caesar Rodney School District for approximately eight years.
- In late 2006 and early 2007, Lehto reconnected with a 17-year-old high school senior who previously had been his elementary student; they met again when she came to the elementary school to pick up her younger sibling (then one of Lehto’s students).
- Their contact progressed from conversations and calls to assistance on a school project and then to repeated sexual conduct, including sexual contact and digital penetration, occurring off school premises (including at Lehto’s home during school hours and in a public parking lot).
- Police investigated after a report from a third party; Lehto and the student gave statements admitting sexual contact.
- Lehto was arrested and initially charged with fourth-degree rape based on a position-of-trust theory, but the State later entered a non-prosecution order.
- The Board notified Lehto it intended to terminate his employment for “immorality and/or misconduct in office” under 14 Del. C. § 1411.
- After a hearing, the Board terminated Lehto, finding no factual dispute about the relationship and concluding the conduct violated community standards, sent an improper message about student-teacher boundaries, and reflected judgment below what is acceptable for teachers.
- The Superior Court affirmed under substantial-evidence review, finding the undisputed conduct could impair teaching effectiveness; Lehto appealed to the Delaware Supreme Court.

## Issues

1. Whether substantial evidence supported the Board’s finding that Lehto’s admitted sexual relationship with a 17-year-old former student constituted “immorality” under 14 Del. C. § 1411.
2. Whether substantial evidence supported a sufficient nexus between Lehto’s off-duty conduct and his fitness to teach, such that the conduct could reasonably be found to impair teaching effectiveness.

## Decision

- The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the judgment upholding the Board’s termination decision.
- The court held there was substantial evidence that Lehto’s conduct met the statutory definition of “immorality” as inconsistent with community standards and a bad example for students.
- The court held the Board reasonably found a nexus between the conduct and fitness to teach because the relationship arose from a school-related connection and role-model/mentor expectations, and the conduct was known in the community in a way that could impair effectiveness.
- The court held the absence of a criminal prosecution or conviction did not bar termination based on the admitted conduct.
- The court reiterated that reviewing courts do not reweigh evidence; they determine only whether a reasonable mind could accept the record as adequate to support the Board’s conclusion.

## Legal Principles

- “Immorality” under 14 Del. C. § 1411 is conduct inconsistent with standards generally accepted by the community and that constitutes a bad example for students.
- “Just cause” exists when the teacher’s conduct may reasonably be found to impair teaching effectiveness by reason of unfitness to teach.
- Under substantial-evidence review, a board decision is upheld if a reasonable mind could accept the evidence as adequate; the appellant bears the burden to show the absence of substantial evidence.
- Off-premises, off-duty conduct may satisfy the statutory nexus requirement when it is connected to the teacher’s professional role (including role-model and mentoring responsibilities) and reasonably may undermine effectiveness and trust.

## Conclusion

The court upheld the school board’s termination of a teacher for immorality where undisputed evidence showed he engaged in sexual conduct with a 17-year-old former student, and the board reasonably found the conduct violated community standards and could impair his fitness and effectiveness as a teacher.


Lehto v. Bd. of Educ. of the Caesar Rodney Sch. Dist., 962 A.2d 222 (Del. 2008)