Beach v. Ellis Sch. Dist. No. 87 of Minnehaha Cnty., 8453.
| Decision Date | 15 August 1941 |
| Docket Number | No. 8453.,8453. |
| Citation | 68 S.D. 86,298 N.W. 727 |
| Parties | BEACH v. ELLIS SCHOOL DIST. NO. 87 OF MINNEHAHA COUNTY. |
| Court | South Dakota Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Circuit Court, Minnehaha County; Lucius J. Wall, Judge.
Action by Neva M. Beach against Ellis School District No. 87 of Minnehaha County, South Dakota, for breach of contract, whereby plaintiff was employed to teach the district school. From a judgment of dismissal, plaintiff appeals.
Judgment reversed.
Chris Mortenson, Jerry Maher, and T. R. Johnson, all of Sioux Falls, for appellant.
Theodore N. Feyder and Nils A. Boe, both of Sioux Falls, for respondent.
This controversy involves the employment of a school teacher to teach the school of a common school district. It appears without dispute that two members of the school board of the defendant school district signed a contract of employment with the plaintiff to teach the district school for the year 1939. Thereafter one of the members of the board who signed this contract was replaced and the board as newly constituted employed a teacher other than the plaintiff to teach the district school for the period covered by plaintiff's contract. This action was brought to recover damages for breach of contract. The trial court held that the plaintiff had no valid contract for her employment as a teacher and entered judgment dismissing her complaint. For the purposes of this opinion we may concede that the action of the two members of the district school board, who signed the contract of employment with the plaintiff, was not the action of the board, as such, taken at a regular or regularly called special meeting. The plaintiff has appealed from the judgment entered by the trial court.
In 1893 there was enacted a set of laws governing education in this state, Chapter 78, Laws of 1893. Section 1 of Chapter 5 of that enactment provided, among powers and duties of the district school board, as follows: Section 1 of Chapter 6 of that act provides, as follows: “Teachers shall be employed only upon the exhibition of a teacher's certificate valid in the county where employed, and then only upon a written contract, signed by the teacher and at least two (2) members of the district school board * * * and said contract shall be signed in duplicate and one (1) copy filed in the office of the clerk, and the other retained by the teacher.” Section 2 of Chapter 8 of that law is, as follows: “No contract binding on the school district shall be made in any case except by the school board or board of education, acting as such, at a regular or regularly called special meeting.”
In 1897 this code of laws relating to education received extensive amendments, Chapter 57, Laws of 1897. However, so far as here material Section 1 of Chapter 5 and Section 1 of Chapter 6 remained the same as they appeared in the Laws of 1893. Section 2 of Chapter 8, however, was amended, and it is the meaning of this law as amended in 1897 which is now before us. Section 2 of Chapter 8 was amended, as follows: “No contract binding on the school district shall be made in any case except by the school board or board of education, acting as such, at a regular or regularly called special meeting, excepting contracts made for the employment of teachers.” The amendment as made in 1897 is, of course, the underscored lines of the above section as quoted.
In 1900 the attorney general of this state was asked to construe this Section 2 of Chapter 8, as amended, and in the opinions of the attorney general for the year 1900 on Page 139 thereof, is found the following opinion dated September 16, 1899, and addressed to Hon. E. E. Collins, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Pierre, S. D.:
“The other question propounded by the Superintendent is a case where it is stated that a school board decided to hire a man; later the clerk and chairman hired a lady teacher without the knowledge of the treasurer, asking whether the other two members had a right to hire the lady teacher.
“Section 1 of Chapter 6 of the School Law provides, 'That a teacher's contract shall be signed by at least two members of the district school board.'
“Section 2 of Chapter 8 provides, 'That no contract binding on the school district shall be made in any case except by the school board or board of education, acting as such, at a regular or regularly called special meeting, excepting contracts made for the employment of teachers.'
“It will thus be seen that the employment of a teacher is not necessarily done at a regular meeting of the school board, and it would seem that a contract made with the teacher, signed by the teacher and two members of the board, would be a valid and binding contract.”
These various sections of the law as existing in 1897 were carried through the revision of our code in 1903, through the revision of the school laws in 1907, and into the code of 1919, wherein the above quoted portion of Section 1 of Chapter 5 of the Laws of 1893 appears as Section 7488, R.C.1919. Section 1 of Chapter 6 of the Laws of 1893 appears as Section 7508, R.C.1919, and Section 2 of Chapter 8 of the Laws of 1893, as amended by the Laws of 1897, appears as Section 7518, R. C.1919.
In 1931 a new and revised code of laws relating to education was passed by the legislature of this state, Chapter 138, Laws of 1931. In Section 71 of this law relating to the powers of school boards, no referenceis made to the employment of teachers. The provisions of this law, insofar as they relate to the employment of teachers, are found in Sections 74 and 224. Section 224 is a revised from of Section 1 of Chapter 6 of the Laws of 1893, and is as follows: “A teacher shall be employed only upon exhibition of a certificate valid to teach the subjects and grades in the school contemplated under the contract, and then only upon written contract signed by the teacher and, in Common School Districts, by at least two members of the Board; in other districts by the presiding officer of the Board and Clerk.” Section 2 of Chapter 8 of the Laws of 1893, as amended by the Laws of 1897, was carried into Chapter 138, Laws of 1931, as Section 74 and appears in words precisely as it appears in the Laws of 1897. So far as here material, the above provisions of the Laws of 1931 were carried into the 1939 Revised Code without change and appear as SDC 15. 2025 and 15.3081. It would therefor appear that there is no specific requirement in our law as it now exists that the employment of a teacher be by the school board, as such.
In 1932 the attorney general of this state was called upon to construe the then...
To continue reading
Request your trial