Caverno v. Fellows
| Decision Date | 26 May 1934 |
| Citation | 190 N.E. 739,286 Mass. 440 |
| Parties | CAVERNO v. FELLOWS et al. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Superior Court, Middlesex County; J. Walsh, Judge.
Action of tort by Elizabeth S. Caverno against Ernest W. Fellows and others. From an order sustaining demurrers to her declaration, plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
F. C. Zacharer, of Lowell, for appellant.
C. W. Wonson, of Gloucester, for appellees.
This is an action of tort brought by one who was a teacher of English in the high school of the city of Gloucester from 1925 until her dismissal by the school committee of that city in 1933. The defendants are respectively the superintendent of schools, the principal of the high school and the supervisor of the English department in the high school in that city. In both counts of the plaintiff's declaration are allegations to the effect that by virtue of G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 71, § 41, she had tenure of office and was employed to serve at the discretion of the school committee, and that in October, 1933, she was dismissed as such teacher by vote of the school committee; that the defendants ‘unlawfully and without justifiable cause did conspire to have the said plaintiff dismissed from her said position as school teacher and in pursuance of said conspiracy made false, fictitious, and fraudulent charges against the said plaintiff to the members of the said School Committee of the said City of Gloucester and did hamper, obstruct and impede the said plaintiff in her said work as teacher in the High School of the said City of Gloucester and did watch her and did annoy her and did make false and fictitious charges, accusations and statementsabout her and against her.’ In the first count the allegation of damage is injury to the plaintiff's health, inability to pursue her occupation as teacher, necessity of employment of medical care and attention, loss of time and expense for medical care. The second count alleges that by reason of the false, fictitious and fraudulent charges, accusations and statements a majority of the members of the school committee became prejudiced against the plaintiff and thus she lost her position as school teacher. The defendants severally demurred to the declaration on the grounds that (1) the allegations in law are insufficient to enable the plaintiff to maintain her action, (2) the plaintiff alleges action taken by the school committee of the city and any remedy of the plaintiff should be pursued according to the statutes in such matters provided, and (3) no particular false, fictitious or fraudulent charge or act is specified. The several demurrers were sustained and the plaintiff's appeal brings the case here.
It is a general principle that it is an actionable wrong for one maliciously to induce another to break his contract with the plaintiff. The plaintiff was employed by the city by virtue of a contract. The government of the schools and the supervision of teachers are largely under the direct or indirect control of the school committee. Teachers however have a considerable security as to tenure and compensation. Paquette v. City of Fall River, 278 Mass. 172, 174, 179 N. E. 588;Russell v. Gannon, 281 Mass. 398, 183 N. E. 736. G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 71 §§ 42, 43. The plaintiff like any other employee was entitled to protection under the law against tortious conduct by a third person maliciously and without justifiable cause designed to move the school committee to end her employment as teacher ‘whether the inducement be false slanders or successful persuasion.’ Moran v. Dunphy, 177 Mass. 485, 487, 59 N. E. 125, 126,52 L. R. A. 115, 83 Am. St. Rep. 289. Violation of her rights in this respect by a third person would constitute a cause of action. The essential allegations of the declaration so far as they relate to false...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Clark-Aiken Co. v. Cromwell-Wright Co., Inc.
...(1943), although '(g)reat detail in pleading well known torts or infringement of legal rights is not required.' Caverno v. Fellows, 286 Mass. 440, 443, 190 N.E. 739, 740 (1934). Grueninger v. President & Fellows of Harvard College, 343 Mass. 338, 340, 178 N.E.2d 917 (1961). We must examine ......
-
Comerford v. Meier
...had entered. Zevitas v. Adams, 276 Mass. 307, 177 N.E. 114;Cummings v. Harrington, 278 Mass. 527, 180 N.E. 519;Caverno v. Fellows, 286 Mass. 440, 190 N.E. 739;Johnson v. East Boston Savings Bank, 290 Mass. 441, 195 N.E. 727. The gravamen of the present action is not that the association its......
-
Fleming v. Dane
...12;Cummings v. Harrington, 278 Mass. 527, 529, 530, 180 N.E. 519;Robitaille v. Morse, 283 Mass. 27, 31, 186 N.E. 78;Caverno v. Fellows, 286 Mass. 440, 443, 444, 190 N.E. 739;Johnson v. East Boston Savings Bank, 290 Mass. 441, 195 N.E. 727;McCarthy v. Hawes, Mass., 12 N.E.2d 722;DesLauries v......
-
Neustadt v. Employers Liab. Assur. Corp.
...in a situation ‘where mere force of numbers acting in unison or other exceptional circumstances may make a wrong.’ Caverno v. Fellows, 286 Mass. 440, 444, 190 N.E. 739, 740;McCarthy v. Collector of Taxes, Mass., 12 N.E.2d 722. And in order to prove an independent tort for conspiracy upon th......