Reubelt v. The School Town of Noblesville

• Decision Date: 24 May 1886
• Docket Number: 12,662
• Citation: Reubelt v. The School Town of Noblesville, 7 N.E. 206, 106 Ind. 478 (Ind. 1886)
• Parties: Reubelt v. The School Town of Noblesville
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court

7 N.E. 206

106 Ind. 478

Reubelt v. The School Town of Noblesville

No. 12,662

Supreme Court of Indiana

May 24, 1886

From the Hamilton Circuit Court.

The judgment is reversed at the cost of appellee, and the cause is remanded with instructions to the court to overrule the demurrer to the complaint.

R. R Stephenson and W. R. Fertig, for appellant.

J. R Christian, W. S. Christian, T. J. Kane and T. P. Davis, for appellee.

OPINION

Zollars, J.

The school trustees of the town of Noblesville, in session on the 4th day of May, 1885, passed an order which was entered of record, employing appellant as superintendent and teacher of the Noblesville schools for the school year commencing on the 14th day of September, 1885, for the sum of $ 950 for the year.

In pursuance of that action, a written contract was drawn up and signed by the parties. In June following, a new trustee was elected in place of one in office when the contract was made and whose term had expired. After the election of the new member, and the reorganization, as required by the statute the board, as thus reorganized, repudiated the action of the board in May, and the contract with appellant in pursuance thereof, as illegal and void, passed an order employing another superintendent, and gave notice to appellant that he should not act as superintendent and teacher in the school, and henceforth refused to recognize him as such.

This action by appellant is to recover damages resulting from the breach of his contract with the board.

The case in behalf of appellee is rested upon the following section, R. S. 1881:

"4439. School trustees in cities and towns. 5. The common council of each city and the board of trustees of each incorporated town of this State shall, at their first regular meeting in the month of June, elect three school trustees (who shall hold their office one, two, and three years respectively, as said trustees shall determine by lot at the time of their organization), and, annually thereafter, shall elect one school trustee, who shall hold his office for three years. Said trustees shall constitute the school board of the city or town; and, before entering upon the duties of their office, shall take an oath faithfully to discharge the duties of the same. They shall meet within five days after their election, and organize by electing one of their number as president, one as secretary, and one as treasurer. The treasurer, before entering upon the duties of his office, shall execute a bond, to the acceptance of the county auditor, conditioned as in ordinary official bonds, with at least two sufficient freehold sureties, who shall not be members of said board, in a sum not less than double the amount of money which may come into his hands, within any one year, by virtue of his office. The president and secretary shall each give bond, with like sureties, to be approved by the county auditor, in any sum not less than one-third of the treasurer's bond. All vacancies that may occur in said board of school trustees shall be filled by the common council of the city or board of trustees of the town; but such election to fill a vacancy shall only be for the unexpired term. The board of school trustees shall, each year, within five days after the annual election of a member, reorganize their board and execute their respective bonds for the ensuing year. Said trustees shall receive for their services such compensation as the common council of the city or the board of trustees of the town may deem just; which compensation shall be paid from the special school revenue of the city or town."

It is contended in behalf of appellee, that considerations of public policy, and a proper construction of the above statute, require a holding that the contract was and is invalid, for the reason that the board of school trustees, as then constituted, had no authority to employ a superintendent, and thereby bind the school corporation, and forestall the board as constituted after the election of the new member.

This contention is based upon that part of the above section of the statute which requires that "The board of trustees shall, each year, within five days after the annual election of a member, reorganize their board and execute...