WEIRTON — Members of the West Virginia Board of Education are expected to discuss a notice of litigation involving Dan Enich, the former superintendent of Hancock County Schools, when they meet Wednesday.

In a March 9 letter sent to L. Paul Hardesty, president of the state school board, Weirton attorney Eric Frankovitch wrote that the notice was being provided to allow Hardesty and the board to review the allegations and determine whether they wanted to resolve the issues before the civil suit was formally filed.

Enich served as superintendent of the district from July 1, 2023, until Jan. 16, when he and Assistant Superintendent Dave Smith were removed from their positions after an emergency meeting by the state school board.

The decision came after months of concern about the district’s financial status, which saw it fall millions of dollars in debt, and culminated in a letter in which the school system requested assistance in meeting payroll.

Walter Saunders, who had been serving as director of federal programs and assessment for Ohio County Schools, was appointed by the state as the new superintendent.

The district has experienced job cuts and transfers since then.

Several allegations against Hardesty and the board are mentioned in the complaint — which has not been filed — including whistleblower retaliation, wrongful discharge, defamation, false light invasion of privacy, interference with business expectancy, and deprivation of due process.

The complaint alleges that stigmatizing statements from the defendants, combined with Enich’s termination, damaged his name and professional standing and impaired his ability to work in his chosen vocation. It adds that conduct by the defendants has caused damages including loss of wages and benefits, reputational harm, emotional distress and other damages.

The complaint says longstanding failures in the school system’s financial controls and forecasting existed before Enich’s tenure, including long-term nonuse or improper use of the West Virginia Education Information System. The state board knew, or should have known, about those deficiencies, it adds.

It also alleges that the defendants terminated Enich and allowed or caused stigmatizing public accusations to persist without providing adequate safeguards or a name-clearing hearing.

Frankovitch said he was not able to comment when contacted Monday afternoon. Christy Day, director of communications, said the state school board generally does not issue statements about notices of litigation.