Goetz v. School-District No. 59

17 N.W. 276, 31 Minn. 164, 1883 Minn. LEXIS 39
Supreme Court of Minnesota·Decided October 15, 1883·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

By the Court.

The allegation in the complaint that the plaintiff was “a duly qualified teacher of and in the public schools of the state, ” includes the fact that he had received the certificate required by the statute, for without that fact he could not be a duly qualified teacher. The complaint differs from, that in Ryan v. School-District, 27 Minn. 433, in which there was no allegation of the receipt of the certificate, nor of any fact which included or was equivalent to the allegation of that fact. See Minn. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Morrison, 23 Minn. 308; Folsom v. County of Chisago, 28 Minn. 324.

Order affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Goetz v. School-District No. 59, 17 N.W. 276, 31 Minn. 164, 1883 Minn. LEXIS 39 (Mich. 1883).

17 N.W. 276 (Goetz v. School-District No. 59) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Moon v. Allen
84 N.W. 654 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1900)
Glass v. St. Paul Park Carriage & Sleigh Co.
45 N.W. 150 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1890)