State Ex Rel. Blair v. Gettinger

105 N.E.2d 161, 230 Ind. 588, 1952 Ind. LEXIS 228
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedApril 15, 1952
Docket28,829
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 105 N.E.2d 161 (State Ex Rel. Blair v. Gettinger) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State Ex Rel. Blair v. Gettinger, 105 N.E.2d 161, 230 Ind. 588, 1952 Ind. LEXIS 228 (Ind. 1952).

Opinions

[591]*591Draper, J.

The parties signed a contract whereby the appellees employed the appellant to teach grades one and two in a school of appellee Jackson School Township in Randolph County; Indiana, during the school year 1948-1949. She completed that year and upon being refused employment for the succeeding year, she brought this action to mandate the appellees to reinstate her to her former position on the same terms and for the same wages she received in the school year 1948-1949, and for payment of her salary for the succeeding year.

From an adverse decision she appeals, asserting that the decision of the court is contrary to law.

The evidence most favorable to the appellees discloses that the appellee trustee entered into negotiations with the appellant to engage her services as a teacher for grades one and two in said school. The trustee told appellant the regular teacher for grades one and two would be gone for a year, and he had only one year’s employment to offer her, and he asked her if she were licensed to teach grades one and two. She informed him that she was so licensed. The trustee told appellant the position paid $2400 per year, but he would pay her $2500 since the position was to be for one year only. Thereupon a printed contract in the usual form was signed by the parties.

About two weeks after the opening of school the appellant brought to the trustee the teacher’s license which she held and same was approved by the superintendent. The appellant taught the school year of 1948-1949. On the last day of that school year the appellant inquired whether the teacher whose place she had taken was returning for the following school year, and the trustee answered in the affirmative. The trustee informed appellant that the township paid its [592]*592regular teachers in ten monthly installments, but since she was not returning he would pay the entire balance due her at that time, which he did. The evidence would further indicate that the appellant understood she was not returning for the following year and attempted to make other arrangements for a different school and that she never turned in her teacher’s reports as required by law for the 1948-1949 school term. The appellees offered testimony designed to establish appellant’s incompetence to teach the first and second grades, but such evidence was rejected.

As above stated, the contract was in usual form, without special provisions of any kind. The appellant alleged, and on the record before us it must be taken as true, that she neither resigned in writing, received another contract, nor was timely notified in writing that her contract would not be renewed for the succeeding year, in the absence of either of which a valid contract of the kind under consideration must be deemed to continue in force for the succeeding year under the provisions of Burns’ 1948 Replacement, §28-4321.

The appellees assert, however, that the appellant had no license to teach the first and second grades in the 1948-1949 school year, although she represented to the appellees that she was so licensed and so induced the signing of the contract. That assertion raises the first and perhaps the most important question in the case:

The appellant could not lawfully be employed to teach the first and second grades if she did not hold a license of the kind and grade required for that position. Burns’ 1948 Replacement, §28-4208; Opinions Atty. Gen’l. of Indiana, 1933, p. 199. The township could not be bound by a contract not authorized by law. Honey Creek School Township v. Barnes et al. [593]*593(1889), 119 Ind. 213, 21 N. E. 747. Such an attempted contract would be void, Putnam v. The School Town of Irvington (1879), 69 Ind. 80; The City of Indianapolis v. Wann, Receiver (1896), 144 Ind. 175, 42 N. E. 901, 31 L. R. A. 743, and could not support a recovery, Jackson School Township v. Farlow (1881), 75 Ind. 118. Whether or not the appellant was licensed to teach the first and second grades in the school year 1948-1949 must be determined by the application of the law to all of the evidence in the case, regardless of which party adduced it.

On September 9, 1925, there was issued to the appellant:

“ELEMENTARY LICENSE, FIRST GRADE INTERMEDIATE AND GRAMMAR GRADES
valid for employment in the public schools of Indiana for the corresponding kind of school work described on the reverse side of this license.”

On the reverse side appeared, among other material, the following:

'Intermediate and Grammar Grades
Date Valid Until
“1st Grade InterGrammer license renewed 4/17/34 7/24/35
1st. gr. Elementary license renewed 9/30/35 7/24/40
1st grade elementary license renewed 9/17/41 7/24/45
1st grade elementary license renewed 1/16/46 7/24/50”

The reverse side also bears the notation of various renewals of the license, the last of which indicates that [594]*594the license was renewed and valid from 7/25/45 until 7/24/50. It bears the further notation:

“Elementary License. ■
“Kindergarten License, ‘good in the kindergarten and first grade of any elementary school.’
“Primary License, ‘good for teaching in the first, second, third and fourth grades of any elementary school.’
“Intermediate License, ‘good for teaching in the fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth grades of any elementary school.’
“Grammer Grade License, ‘good for teaching in the fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth grades of any elementary school and first grade in the seventh and eighth grades of any junior high school.’
ii 9)

The license held by the appellant was originally issued pursuant to and in accordance with Acts 1923, ch. 11, §9, being Burns’ 1948 Replacement, §28-4209. Subd. 8a thereof provides for kindergarten and first grade licenses. Subd. 8b, under the heading “Primary teachers license” provides for licenses to teach the first to fourth grades, both inclusive, of any elementary school. Other portions of Subd. 8 follow:

“c. Intermediate grade teacher’s license:
“(1) Intermediate grade teacher’s license, first grade, valid for five (5) years, renewable thereafter for life on presentation of evidence of successful experience and professional spirit, and good for teaching in the fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth grades of any elementary school. An intermediate grade teacher’s license, first grade, .may be issued to persons who have completed a two-year standard or approved normal school course, and who have specialized in fourth, fifth, and sixth grade teaching.
[595]*595“d. Grammar grade teacher’s license:

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

Related

Miller Brewing Co. v. Bartholemew County Beverage Co.
674 N.E.2d 193 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1996)
Indiana Department of State Revenue v. Bulkmatic Transport Co.
648 N.E.2d 1156 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1995)
Avery v. Webb
480 N.E.2d 281 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1985)
State v. Cowdell
421 N.E.2d 667 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1981)
City of Evansville v. Southern Indiana Gas & Electric Co.
339 N.E.2d 562 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1976)
Crockett v. Andrews
172 S.E.2d 384 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1970)
Boatright v. School District Number Six
415 P.2d 340 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1966)
State Ex Rel. Blair v. Gettinger
105 N.E.2d 161 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1952)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
105 N.E.2d 161, 230 Ind. 588, 1952 Ind. LEXIS 228, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-blair-v-gettinger-ind-1952.