Gambrell v. The District Township of Lenox

• Decision Date: 05 October 1880
• Citation: 6 N.W. 693,54 Iowa 417
• Parties: GAMBRELL v. THE DISTRICT TOWNSHIP OF LENOX
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

6 N.W. 693

54 Iowa 417

GAMBRELL v. THE DISTRICT TOWNSHIP OF LENOX

Supreme Court of Iowa, Des Moines

October 5, 1880

Appeal from Iowa Circuit Court.

ACTION upon a contract employing plaintiff to teach a public school. There was a verdict and judgment for plaintiff; defendant appeals.

REVERSED.

Rumple & Lake, for appellant.

Hedges & Alverson, for appellee.

OPINION

BECK J.

I.

The plaintiff entered into a written contract to teach a public school, with the acting director of one of the subdistricts of the district township of Lenox. This contract was not filed with nor approved by the president of the district township. Before plaintiff commenced teaching another director succeeded the one with whom she contracted, under the decision of the court in an action brought by him against the acting director. The director thus declared to be the legal officer entered into a contract with another teacher who taught the school for the time specified in the contract with plaintiff, who brings this action to recover against the district for breach of the contract. Much is said by counsel upon the question involving the right of the acting director to enter into the contract. We think this question becomes unimportant in the view we take of the case; we will, therefore, give it no consideration.

II. The defendant asked the court to give the following instruction: "If you find that the contract upon which plaintiff sues in this action was never approved by and filed with the president of the defendant's board of school directors, as provided by the law, then the plaintiff is not entitled to recover in this action, unless you further find that said contract has been ratified, and the burden is upon plaintiff to show such ratification by a preponderance of evidence, and if she fails to so satisfy you, your verdict will be for the defendant." This instruction was pertinent to the issues, and applicable to the evidence in the case. We are of the opinion that it should have been given.

Code § 1753, provides that the subdirectors of the district townships shall make contracts for employing teachers of schools in their respective subdistricts, and all contracts made by them shall be approved by the president and reported to the board of directors of the district townships. This statute prescribes the manner of entering into a contract which shall be binding upon the district as an incorporation. It must...