Marple was not superintendent during that time, and the state Board of Education didn't publicly discuss or vote on the decision to make that payment.
"I believe it was made by the lawyers," board President Wade Linger said Friday in a phone interview.
Marple received $4,489 from the department in pay for Nov. 16-29, according to state records. The payment was made because of a "new vote to terminate employment."
On Nov. 15 the board voted 5-2 to fire Marple. She was to vacate her office by the close of business that day.
The next day the department sent $4,833 to Marple as final pay for Nov. 1-Nov. 15, according to state records. Her salary was $167,000 a year.
Marple's surprise firing outraged many members of the education community, with some calling for more openness by the board and questioning whether the action was done legally.
Mountain State Justice, a Charleston-based public interest law firm, on Nov. 21 asked the state Supreme Court to find that the board had violated the Open Meetings Act.
Marple's termination was not listed on the agenda for the Nov. 15 board meeting. When legal counsel advised Linger that the board should take no action without notifying the public in advance, he said he would take his chances, according to Mountain State Justice's lawsuit.
The Supreme Court called for the board's response by Friday. Last Tuesday or Wednesday the office of the state Attorney General appointed the law firm of Pullin, Fowler, Flanagan, Brown & Poe to represent the board, Linger said.
The firm compiled the board's response to the Mountain State Justice allegations and submitted it to the high court late Friday. The document states the board does not believe it violated any laws in firing Marple Nov. 15, but if others perceive a possible violation, then a meeting this past Thursday cleared up those concerns.
Twenty people addressed the board over two hours on Thursday. Most spoke in favor of Marple, and all questioned the way in which she was fired. After the public comment portion of the meeting, the board gathered behind closed doors for nearly 90 minutes. Then it returned to open session and again voted to fire Marple.
Following the meeting, Linger said the attorneys said it was a good idea to pay Marple for the period between the two meetings, and he agreed.
"We don't think we did anything wrong on the 15th, but at some point if somebody said that we did, we wanted to make sure we cleared that up," Linger said.
"The other part of making it right is to make sure that if we were wrong, then Dr. Marple would have been paid for those two weeks. And we wanted to make sure we covered that side, too," he continued.