Davis v. Moseley

55 S.E.2d 329, 230 N.C. 645, 1949 N.C. LEXIS 427

• Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
• Decided: September 28, 1949
• Status: Published

Opinion

WiNBORNE, J.

The sole assignment of error presented on this appeal ■challenges the correctness of the ruling of the trial judge in granting defendants’ motion for judgment as of nonsuit at the close of evidence ■offered by plaintiff.

It appears from the record that this ruling was based upon two grounds: The first is that this action is in effect an action against the State, and may not be maintained by the plaintiff. This subject was fully considered by this Court in the case of Kirby v. Board of Education, ante, 619. It was there held that such an action as this may be maintained against the county board of education. What is said there is applicable here, and on the authority of that case this ground for sustaining the nonsuit is untenable.

However, the second ground for the nonsuit, that is, that the evidence fails to make out a case, is sound.

In this connection, it is provided in G-.S. 115-354 that a contract of a teacher or a principal shall continue from year to year until the teacher or principal is notified as provided in G.S. 115-359; Provided, such teacher or principal give notice of acceptance of the employment as there required. Kirby v. Board of Education, supra. And the notice required by G.S. 115-359 is that “it shall be the duty of such county superintendent ... to notify all teachers and/or principals now or hereafter employed, by registered letter, of his or her rejection prior to the close of the school term . . .”

Thus it appears that, by force of this statute, the notification is complete when the letter containing it is both mailed and registered. 39 Am. Jur. 250, Section 28. Hence, the evidence indicating the mailing of such letter prior to the close of the school term shows a compliance with the statute.

The judgment below is

Affirmed.