State Ex Rel. Glover v. Holbrook

• Court: Florida Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: BROWN, Justice.
• Citation: State Ex Rel. Glover v. Holbrook, 129 Fla. 241, 176 So. 99 (Fla. 1937)
• Decision Date: 08 September 1937
• Parties: STATE ex rel. GLOVER SAME v. HOLBROOK et al. SAME v. MUNNERLYN et al.

176 So. 99

129 Fla. 241

STATE ex rel. GLOVER SAME v. HOLBROOK et al. SAME v. MUNNERLYN et al.

Florida Supreme Court

September 8, 1937

En Banc.

Original proceeding in mandamus by the State, on the relation of J. R Glover, against J. R. Holbrook and others, as members of and constituting the Board of Public Instruction of Orange County, and against J. B. Munnerlyn and others, as members of and constituting the Trustees of Special Tax School District No. 12, of Orange County, wherein alternative writs were issued and respondents moved to quash.

Motions to quash denied and peremptory writ issued against the Board of Public Instruction forthwith; trustees allowed three days in which to file an answer, with peremptory writ to issue upon failure to so file.

BROWN J., dissenting in part.

COUNSEL

Baker & Thornal, of Orlando, for relator.

G. B Fishback, of Orlando, for respondents.

OPINION

BROWN Justice.

These two cases are so closely connected that they will be considered together. The decision of both cases depends upon the validity vel non of chapter 18743, Acts 1937, being 'An Act Providing for Tenure of Employment of Teachers in the Public Schools of Orange County, Florida,' etc.

It appears from both of the alternative writs of mandamus that the relator, J. R. Glover, has been employed as a teacher in the public schools of Orange county for the past ten years consecutively. From September, 1933, to September, 1935, he served as principal and teacher of the Winter Garden, Orange County, Elementary School, and from September, 1935, to June, 1937, he served as principal of the Pine Castle, Orange County, Elementary and Junior High School at an annual salary of $1,800.

On or about June 27, 1937, J. B. Munnerlyn and two others, constituting the trustees of Special Tax School District No. 12 of Orange County, Fla., commonly known as the Pine Castle School District, sat in session to nominate teachers for said district for the ensuing school year; that said trustees failed and refused to nominate to Board of Public Instruction of said county the relator as principal of the Pine Castle School, and in his place and stead nominated one Lindsey Perkins; that thereafter on June 27, 1937, the Board of Public Instruction of Orange County approved the nomination of said Lindsey Perkins, and this petitioner was thereby discharged from the service of the public schools of Orange County, Fla.; that relator was by training and experience legally and morally equipped and qualified to continue in the service of the public schools of said county, and particularly as principal of said Pine Castle School; and that his discharge was arbitrary and unreasonable.

However, we might observe at this point that the action thus taken by the district trustees and the County Board of Public Instruction was within their rights and powers under section 10 of chapter 4678, Acts of 1899, which was a general act, and which section now appears as section 710 of the Compiled General Laws of 1927. In the case of State ex rel. Pittman v. Barker, 113 Fla. 865, 152 So. 682, 94 A.L.R. 1481, we held that the trustees of a school district may nominate teachers, and that, while under the statute the County Board of Public Instruction might reject such nominees, such rejection must be reasonably exercised and grounded on some dereliction in statutory or other qualification. And in a subsequent proceeding between the same parties, in State ex rel. Pitman v. Barker, 118 Fla. 380, 160 So. 362, we held that boards of public instruction are given general supervision and control of schools and school interests in the county, and may for a good cause reject nominations of teachers made by the trustees of special tax school district, but that, when the trustees of such a district nominate a teacher who is legally and morally qualified, the question of the suitability to the community and other qualities that go to his adaptability are questions for the trustees to settle, and, when done the County Board of Public Instruction has no right to inquire into them.

But the alternative writs in both of these cases now before us allege the enactment by the Legislature at its 1937 session of said chapter 18743, which was approved by the Governor and became effective as a law on June 10, 1937; that relator had completed his probationary period of employment as a teacher in the public schools of Orange County as defined by said act, and that all things had been done and all acts performed and all time had elapsed sufficient to qualify him for the protective provisions of sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of said act, and that he had not been guilty of any of the causes for discharge or demotion set out in said special act, and that no charges had been preferred against him and no hearing accorded him as required by section 5 of said act. That under and by virtue of the provisions of said act relator is entitled to be reinstated as principal of said Pine Castle School, but that the trustees of said school district and the said Board of Public Instruction of said county had failed and refused, and do now fail and refuse, to reappoint this petitioner to his said position, and in the absence of such appointment have failed and refused to transfer petitioner to another public school within said county in a position of rank and with compensation equivalent to that enjoyed and received by petitioner as principal of said Pine Castle School; all in violation of the provisions of said act.

The command of the alternative writ against Munnerlyn and others, as trustees of the Special School District referred to, is that they forthwith nominate this petitioner to said position as principal of said school at a salary equal to that which the petitioner was receiving at the time of his discharge, and to make such nomination to the Board of Public Instruction of Orange County.

The command of the alternative writ in the case brought against Holbrook and others, as members of and constituting the Board of Public Instruction of Orange County, is that they forthwith appoint and reinstate the relator to the position of principal of said Pine Castle School above referred to, or else transfer this petitioner to another school in Orange County, Fla., in a position of equal rank and with equal compensation enjoyed and received by him in his position as principal of said Pine Castle School, or appear and show cause before this court, if any they have, why a peremptory writ of mandamus should not issue commanding said acts and duties to be done and performed. This command is justified by the provisions of said special act, if such act be valid, when construed and applied with reference to the facts alleged in the writ.

Section 1 of chapter 18743 provides that the term 'teachers' as used in the act shall be deemed to include principals and assistant principals, and certain others, who are holders of certificates and possessing such other qualifications as are required by the laws of the State to make persons eligible to teach in the public schools, and that the term 'probationary period of employment' as used in the act shall be deemed to refer to and include the time of employment of any teacher in the public schools of the county or any special tax school district therein, where such employment extends through a period of three consecutive years, and whether such period shall have been completed before or shall be completed subsequent to the enactment of said statute, with certain other provisions not material here.

Section 3 of the act provides that, after the completion of a probationary period of employment without discharge, such teachers as have completed such probationary period shall be reappointed at the end of each school year and shall continue in the service in which they are then employed during their good behavior and as long as they render efficient and competent service, without reduction in salary or compensation, except as thereinafter provided, and that no such teacher shall be dismissed, discharged, or demoted, except for one or more of the causes specified in section 4 of the act, and then only after due notice of the charge, or charges, brought against such teacher, and a hearing and a finding of the existence of one or more of such causes.

It will thus be seen that this act, which is limited by its terms to Orange County, makes certain radical limitations upon the powers of nomination vested in the trustees of special school districts and the powers or appointment and employment vested in the County Board of Public Instruction by the provisions of section 710 of the Compiled General Laws. It is true that notwithstanding this special statute the trustees of school districts in Orange County still have the empty power to nominate to the County Board of Public Instruction teachers for all schools within the special district, but under the special act, if a teacher in any one of such schools has served three years, the probationary period of employment provided in the act, the trustees are compelled to nominate him, or her, provided such teacher has not forfeited such right and the broad discretion theretofore vested in such trustees is to that extent taken away. Likewise, the Board of Public Instruction is compelled to reappoint and re-employ a teacher who has completed the probationary period referred to, and who has not been demoted or discharged for cause as provided in the act, and to that extent the broad discretion vested in the County Board of Public Instruction of Orange County, and which discretion is by the general law vested in the boards of public instruction of all the other counties in the State, is to that extent limited or taken away.

To both of the alternative...