O'Day v. School Committee of West Brookfield

• Decision Date: 03 November 1961
• Citation: 177 N.E.2d 569,343 Mass. 122
• Parties: Anna M. O'DAY v. SCHOOL COMMITTEE OF WEST BROOKFIELD.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

Page 569

177 N.E.2d 569

343 Mass. 122

Anna M. O'DAY v. SCHOOL COMMITTEE OF WEST BROOKFIELD.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Worcester.

Argued Sept. 25, 1961.

Decided Nov. 3, 1961.

Philip J. Murphy, Fitchburg, for petitioner.

Herman J. Dumas, Worcester, for respondent.

Before WILKINS, C. J., and SPALDING, WILLIAMS, WHITTEMORE and KIRK, JJ.

WILLIAMS, Justice.

This is an appeal by the petitioner from an order of the Superior Court sustaining a demurrer to her petition for a writ of mandamus against the members of the school committee of West Brookfield. The petition alleged that she was a school teacher in the town of West Brookfield having held that position at the discretion of the committee since 1920. On September 4, 1957, she received two written notices from the school committee each dated September 3, 1957. In one she was notified of her suspension from her position as of September 3 for conduct unbecoming a teacher, and in the other that the committee intended to vote on her dismissal at its meeting October 7. On September 12, she requested in writing a written statement of the charges and causes for which her dismissal was proposed and requested a hearing. The charges, containing some twenty-one items under the headings of 'A. Insubordination,' 'B. Conduct Unbecoming a Teacher,' and 'C. Other Good Cause,' were furnished her. See G.L. c. 71, § 42. On October 7, 1957, and February 13-14, 1958, hearings were held before the school committee at which she was represented by counsel. On their conclusion the committee voted to dismiss her. On June 4, 1958, the committee filed with the teachers' retirement board a written notice containing a summary of the facts on which 'purportedly' the action of the committee was based, which 'was not a fair summary' of the facts. Hearings were held before the retirement board on June 27 and November 25, 1958, and on December 5 the board filed a certificate upholding the action of the school committee. The board found that in its procedure the committee complied with the law; that the 'fair summary' of the facts submitted by the committee was substantiated by evidence at the hearings; and that the committee was justified in dismissing the petitioner.

On December 31, 1958, the petitioner filed a petition for review with the District Court of Western Worcester. No order of notice was issued by the court and on March 4, 1959, the respondent committee filed a motion to dismiss the petition for review. After hearing on the motion, the petition was dismissed on January 11, 1960, on the ground that no process was taken out or issued within thirty days after the certification by the board.

The petition for a writ of mandamus concluded with allegations that '[Y]our petitioner has exhausted her statutory remedies' and that 'For all the reasons stated and relied upon above, your petitioner claims that the vote of said school committee dismissing your petitioner * * * was illegal and void; that the purported letter of suspension dated September 3, 1957, actually constituted dismissal without notice or hearing; that the action of the retirement board was unjustified, illegal and void, and that in contemplation of law your petition is still entitled to the position of teacher * * *.'

The petitioner prayed that a writ issue to reinstate her as teacher and to restore her back pay from September 3, 1957.

The respondents demurred on six grounds, the principal averment being that the petition does not set forth 'a cause or...