Tenn. appellate court to hear Sullivan school system appeal in fired teacher Matthew Hawn case

KNOXVILLE — The next step in the saga of fired Sullivan County Schools teacher Matthew Hawn is set to occur Tuesday afternoon. That's when an appellate court panel of judges will hear arguments in the case of the former Sullivan Central High School teacher fired in 2021. The Feb. 24 hearing before the Tennessee Court of Appeals of the Eastern Section is set for 1:30 p.m. Tuesday in Knoxville. Attorneys for both sides previously said the case would take about 30 minutes, with each side allotted 15 minutes each in a civil case to be based on the record, not new information or arguments. However, two other cases are listed on the docket ahead of the Hawn matter. The trajectory of the matter thus far led up to a mid-year trying of the appeal in 2024 followed by a Dec. 16, 2024, ruling by Sullivan County Chancellor Katie Priester that the seven-member county Board of Education lacked adequate ground to fire Hawn. However, the court has other cases ahead of the Hawn matter. A hearing by an independent hearing officer, Cale Conder Jr., who held an administrative hearing on the matter in 2022, upheld the board's decision, which Hawn then appealed through Sullivan County Chancery Court. The county school system appealed chancery court decision that the board erred its its firing of Hawn upon the recommendation of then-Director of Schools David Cox, resulting in Tuesday's hearing. In a case that drew national media attention and high-profile authors of articles presented in Hawn's contemporary affairs class at Central, the school system and later its attorney, Chris McCarty of Knoxville, cited charges of insubordination and unprofessional conduct. Central no longer exists as a high school, having been merged into West Ridge High School in August of 2021 and becoming the home of the new Sullivan Central Middle School there. However, if Priester's ruling stands, it says that Hawn should be reinstated as a teacher with Sullivan County Schools and be paid back wages from the time of his firing. BRIEFS FILED In a document filed Aug. 6, 2025, Hawn attorney, Richard Colbert and Sarah Ingalls of the Franklin, Tennessee-based law firm of Thompson Burton PLLC, argued that Priester's ruling is valid and should stand. The appellate court had no choice but to hear the appeal. However, whichever sides prevails in the forthcoming appeals court ruling would have to convince the state Supreme Court to hear the case, If the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of the case, the appeallate court ruling would stand. The Aug. 6 filing by Colbert and Ingalls, retained by the Tennessee Education or TEA, argues that Hawn, a 16-year teaching veteran "who was highly regarded for his work, showed a video of a spoken-word poem to a class of high school juniors and seniors who were discussing contemporary issues related to race. The poem was 'White Privilege,' read aloud by African American poet Kyla Jenee Lacey. "The poem was written and spoken by a Black woman, and it contained some profanity. Had Mr. Hawn successfully muted the profanity, the director of schools (David Cox) agreed that the poem would have been appropriate material for Mr. Hawn's class," the two attorneys wrote on page 51 of a 52-page document, the last page being a certification of process service to the other side's attorney. "Mr. Hawn tried to mute the profanity, but because a few words slipped in, he was fired. Once one sifts through the board's exaggeration, that is the essence of the board's case for dismissing Mr. Hawn," Colbert and Ingalls wrote. "The chancellor correctly determined that Mr. Hawn was not insubordinate or unprofessional. She also correctly determined that dismissing Mr. Hawn was excessive, and the board waived any challenge on appeal to that determination. The chancellor's thorough and thoughtfully considered decision should be affirmed." The document earlier cited a prior court ruling that "an issue may be deemed waived when it is argued in the brief but is not designated as an issue in accordance" with court Rule 27 (a)(7). In contrast, a brief filed July 7, 2025, by Jane Strevel Hayes and McCarty of Knoxville-based Lewis Thomason PC argued that Chancellor Priester erred repeatedly in her ruling, including allowing evidence outside the written record up to that point, that two "experts" who testified concerning the case did not meet the requirement of the Tennessee Rules of Evidence and that Priester allowing "previously undisclosed expert testimony was unduly prejudicial." The two witnesses were university education professors, one who taught in North Carolina, the other in Tennessee. A livestream of the proceedings is to be available online on the appeallate court's website at https://www.tncourts.gov/courts/court-appeals/oral-arguments?c=28&d=All&ct=All&dmin=02/24/2026&dmax=02/24/2026. Specifically, the livestream will be online at https://www.tncourts.gov/courts/court-appeals/arguments/2026/02/24/matthew-hawn-v-sullivan-county-board-education-et-al. The Kingsport Times News plans to have a reporter at the hearing in downtown Knoxville Tuesday afternoon and will post an article about the hearing online that day and in print Wednesday.