Kirk v. Miller, 42505
| Decision Date | 29 May 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 42505,42505 |
| Citation | 83 Wn.2d 777,522 P.2d 843 |
| Parties | Wendell KIRK et al., Appellants, v. Fred MILLER, Chairman, et al., Respondents. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Witt, Hutchins, Plumb & Wheeler, Edwin J. Wheeler, Tacoma, for appellants.
Ronald L. Hendry, Pros. Atty. for Pierce County, Richard A. Monaghan, Deputy Pros. Atty., Tacoma, for respondents.
Until the end of the 1972 school year, the defendants, directors of White River School District No. 416, offered to the plaintiffs, certified teachers of the district, a single-form contract that contained provisions for curricular activities and extracurricular activities ('special assignments'), with the extracurricular activities segregated both by description and salary. In April, 1972, the defendants proposed to offer plaintiffs two contracts, one encompassing curricular work and pay, and the other for extracurricular work and pay. The defendants intended that the curricular contract be subject to the continuing contract law, and that the supplementary contract not be so subject under RCW 28A.67.074, which specifically provides for and exempts supplemental contracts from the continuing contract law. The school board does now employ all the plaintiffs; there is no question here of wrongful termination or refusal to renew a contract of a particular teacher.
Plaintiffs sought an alternate writ of mandate or declaratory judgment to either compel the school board to issue them contracts identical to those they had received prior to 1972 (single form), or to declare that the two-form contract impinged upon their rights as teachers under the continuing contract law. The trial court initially issued the alternate writ, but following hearing and presentation of defendants' case, dismissed the plaintiffs' cause of action. The court held that: (1) the continuing contract law was intended to apply only to curricular activities, and (2) the defendant school board was able, under RCW 28A.67.074, to issue supplemental contracts providing for extracurricular activities that were not covered by the continuing contract law.
This case then raises initially a question of statutory construction of the continuing contract law, RCW 28A.67.070, and secondly, a question of statutory interpretation, which is one of first impression, of the interface between the continuing contract law and RCW 28A.67.074.
The pertinent parts of the relevant statutes state as follows:
All common schools shall give instruction in reading, penmanship, orthography, written and mental arithmetic, geography, English grammar, physiology and hygiene with special reference to the effects of alcoholic stimulants and narcotics on the human system, the history of the United States, and such other studies as may be prescribed by rule or regulation of the state board of education.
RCW 25A.05.010, Laws of 1969, ch. 71, § 3, p. 218.
No person shall be accounted as a qualified teacher within the meaning of the school law who is not the holder of a valid teacher's certificate or permit issued by lawful authority of this state.
RCW 28A.67.010, Laws of 1969, 1st Ex.Sess., ch. 223, § 28A.67.010, p. 1903.
No teacher, . . . or other certified employee, Holding a position as such with a school district, . . . shall be employed . . . unless he is the holder of an effective teacher's certificate . . . for the position for which the employee is employed.
. . . If (notice and opportunity for hearing on cause for nonrenewal) is not timely given by the district, the employee . . . shall be conclusively presumed to have been reemployed . . . for the next ensuing term Upon contractual terms identical with those which would have prevailed if his employment had actually been renewed . . .
(Italics ours.) RCW 28A.67.070, Laws of 1970, 1st Ex.Sess., ch. 15, § 16, p. 128.
No certificated employee shall be required to perform duties not described in the contract unless a new or supplemental contract is made, except that in an unexpected emergency the board of directors or school district administration may require the employee to perform other reasonable duties on a temporary basis.
No supplemental contract shall be subject to the continuing contract provisions of Titles 28A or 28B.
RCW 28A.67.074, Laws of 1969, 1st Ex.Sess., ch. 283, § 2, p. 2752.
We are satisfied that the reference in the continuing contract statute to 'holding a position as such' means a teaching or administrative position, since both the statute requiring certification (RCW 28A.67.010) and the continuing contract statute were designed to insure professional competence at the teaching level and to protect the teacher from arbitrary discharge in his professional or certificated capacity.
The types of special assignments at issue here include such extracurricular activities as coaching athletic competition, leading musical organizations, and advising special interest clubs such as the Future Farmers of America. Since the special assignments aforementioned are not part of the required curriculum under either RCW 28A.05.010 or the regulations issued pursuant to them by the State...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Schlosser v. Bethel Sch. Dist.
...does not provide tenure for public employees of “ ‘common schools,’ ” which was Schlosser's status here.12Kirk v. Miller, 83 Wash.2d 777, 778, 780, 522 P.2d 843 (1974) (quoting former RCW 28A.05.010 (1969), recodified asRCW 28A.230.020). ¶ 14 Washington's statutory scheme distinguishes betw......
-
Francisco v. Board of Directors of Bellevue Public Schools, Dist. No. 405
.... . Of course, if the contract is terminated wrongfully, the district is liable for the damages suffered . . . Cf., Kirk v. Miller, 83 Wash.2d 777, 781, 522 P.2d 843 (1974). Although RCW 28A.58.450 speaks in terms of 'probable cause' and 'adverse change in contract status,' the gist of the ......
-
Lines v. Yakima Public School, Yakima School Dist. No. 7, 929--III
...the thrust of the cause of action is equitable in nature and, therefore, there is no right to trial by jury. In Kirk v. Miller, 83 Wash.2d 777, 781, 522 P.2d 843, 846 (1974), the court held that the relationship between the school board and teacher is 'created by contract and governed by ge......
-
Greater Johnstown Area Vocational-Technical School v. Greater Johnstown Area Vocational-Technical Educ. Ass'n
...Accord, Chiodo v. Board of Education of Special School District No. 1, 298 Minn. 380, 215 N.W.2d 806 (1974); Kirk v. Miller, 83 Wash.2d 777, 522 P.2d 843 (1974). The Leone court also instructed that its decision comports with "long-established custom which traditionally allows much more fle......