Montgomery v. Crawford

220 P.2d 853, 70 Ariz. 359, 1950 Ariz. LEXIS 239
CourtArizona Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 13, 1950
DocketNo. 5337
StatusPublished

This text of 220 P.2d 853 (Montgomery v. Crawford) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Arizona Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Montgomery v. Crawford, 220 P.2d 853, 70 Ariz. 359, 1950 Ariz. LEXIS 239 (Ark. 1950).

Opinion

LA PRADE, Chief Justice.

The present appeal is from a final judgment in mandamus ordering the appellants as the Board of Trustees of the Arizona Teachers’ Retirement System to enroll the appellees in said system and permit them to secure such benefits as they may be entitled to under the Teachers’ Retirement Act of 1943, Laws 1943, Ch. 61, sections 54-1701 et seq., A.C.A.1939, Cum.Pocket Supp.

The proceeding was initiated by the above-named appellees, all school teachers, for the purpose of obtaining judicial determination and recognition of their asserted rights to membership in the system and approval by the Board of Trustees of their several statements of prior teaching service. Upon issue joined the matter was submitted to the court upon an agreed statement of facts which in brief indicated that the appellees had rendered certain teaching service in Arizona public schools while holding various styled teachers’ certificates issued by the State Board of Education pursuant to the authority granted by section 54-102, A.C.A.1939. Some of these certificates were designated “substitute certificate,” “elementary permit,” “elementary certificate,” “emergency elementary certificate,” “reinstated temporary emergency permit,” and “reinstated temporary emergency certificate,” were issued on a year-to-year basis and declared to be nonrenewable, but had been repeatedly renewed. Appellants in their- briefs refer to these certificates as “substandard teachers’ certificates.” It was further stipulated that each of the appellees had made application for membership in the Arizona Teachers’ Retirement System and for credit for prior service, some of which was rendered under these certificates, but their applications had been denied.

The question presented for determination is: Are the holders of temporary emergency teaching permits or reinstated temporary teaching certificates issued by the Arizona State Board of Education under emergency rulings occasioned by a shortage of teachers during World War II to be considered a “person holding an active teachers’ certificate” as the phrase is used in the Teachers’ Retirement Act of 1943, supra. This act sets up a comprehensive system for the retirement of teachers in the Arizona educational system, together with a board for its administration. Qualifications for members are defined. Provision is made for creditable service and for prior service, credit allowances before the effective date of the act, retirement from service, retirement for disability, service retirement allowances, disability retirement allowances, death benefits, etc. Section 54-1704 is entitled “Membership” and in part provides:

“(a) Any person who becomes an employee after July 1, 1943, shall become a member of the retirement system within one (1) year after the date of his first employment, as a condition of further employment.
“(b) Any person who is an employee as of the effective date of this act shall be[361]*361come a member of the retirement system as of July 1, 1943, unless, [provisions for exclusions].” (Emphasis supplied.)

Section 54-1702 contains the following definitions:

“‘Teacher1 means any person holding an active teachers’ certificate and engaged in instructional work, directly as classroom, laboratory, or other teacher, or indirectly as supervisory teacher, principal, superintendent, or administrative officer, in any school or educational institution or agency supported by the state or any political subdivision thereof, other than the university of Arizona;
“ ‘Employee’ means any teacher employed on■ an annual or monthly salary basis;”. (Emphasis supplied.)

Section 54-1705 relates to credits for prior service and in part provides:

“(a) Each member who was an employee in this state, at any time prior to the establishment of the retirement system, and who became a member before January 1, 1947, shall file a statement of prior service, setting forth in detail all service rendered by him within the state for which he claims credit, and as a teacher without the state. Any member who was not an employee at any time during the year immediately preceding the establishment of the retirement system and who became a member before January 1, 1947, shall file a statement of prior service within the state only. Subject to the restrictions contained in subsection (b), the board shall verify the service claimed as soon as practicable after the statement is filed.
“(b) Upon verification of a statement of prior service, the board shall issue a prior service certificate certifying the number of years of prior service with which the member is credited. Prior service credit shall include all service within the state prior to July 1, 1943, and not more than fifteen (15) years of service as a teacher without the state, out-of-state service being creditable if the member was employed during the year immediately preceding the establishment of the retirement system. Within one year after the date of issuance of a prior service certificate, any member may request the board to modify or correct the same, and thereafter it shall be final and conclusive for retirement purposes.”

It is the contention of appellees that any person holding any type of certificate in force authorizing such person to teach in Arizona schools is the holder of an “active teachers’ certificate,” and cannot be denied membership or authorized prior service credits in such system. Such was the opinion of the superior court as evidenced by its judgment.

The Board of Trustees insists that the appellees are not entitled to membership in the system nor entitled to any prior service credit as provided in the act, “ * * * for the reason that the said board of trustees of [362]*362the said system being endowed by statute with the power and duty to administer the Teachers’ Retirement Act of 1943 and being vested with a sound discretion in its administration, which discretion extends to a construction of said act and the various provisions thereof had, by law, the right to determine and did so determine that those persons holding temporary emergency ‘substandard’ teaching certificates were not holders of active teachers’ certificates within the contemplation and meaning of said act and thus did not come within the coverage of said act.”

The board argues that since the matter of the certification of teachers has been by statute vested solely in the Arizona State Board of Education, section 54-102, supra, no teacher can object because he is not placed in the same classification as those members of the teaching profession possessing all the qualifications for regular and fully accredited certificate holders. This is undoubtedly true for differentiations established in educational qualifications, but it does not follow that, because the State Board of Education may classify teachers upon a basis of educational or experience qualifications, one certificated for restricted activity or upon a lower plane is not a fully certificated active teacher when actually engaged in teaching, within the meaning of the provisions of the act providing benefits and rewards for teaching service. It was by virtue of the rulings of the State Board of Education that appellees obtained certificates authorizing them to teach.

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

Related

Wilbur v. United States Ex Rel. Kadrie
281 U.S. 206 (Supreme Court, 1930)
Board of Regents of University & State Colleges v. Frohmiller
208 P.2d 833 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1949)
State Board of Barber Examiners v. Walker
192 P.2d 723 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1948)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
220 P.2d 853, 70 Ariz. 359, 1950 Ariz. LEXIS 239, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/montgomery-v-crawford-ariz-1950.