Hitchcock Military Academy v. Myers
THE COURT.
Action by plaintiff to recover of the defendant $900 alleged to be due on account of certain contracts for tuition, entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant. Respondent had judgment for $896.91 and from this judgment the defendant appeals. It appears from the transcript that the defendant is the mother of two minor sons, Paul de Back Myers and Theodore E. Myers; that on or about the first day of June, 1924, at San Rafael, the plaintiff and the defendant entered into a contract in writing for the admission of the two minor sons of the defendant into the school conducted by the plaintiff for a school year, beginning September 3, 1924, and ending June 3, 1925. The applications for admission of the two minor sons of the defendant to the Hitchcock Military Academy were made subject to tbe current printed register and regulations of the Academy for the period above mentioned. These terms and conditions are as follows:
[475]
“TEEMS.
“Cadets are accepted only for the entire school year, or for the remainder of a school year if received after the opening date.
Pro-rata
allowance will be made if a boy is accepted after the first four weeks of the school year, but no reduction or credit will be granted if a cadet is expelled, suspended, or withdrawn.
“Charges for Resident Cadets.
“The charge for board, tuition, room, minor medical attention, athletics and use of the Academy swimming pool and government arms for the school year of approximately thirty-seven weeks, is $950, payable as follows:
“$50.00 registration fee, to accompany the application for admission of new boys or the application for readmission of old boys;
“$450.00 payable on entrance in September;
“$450.00 payable at the close of the Christmas vacation. . . .
“Cancellations.
“Registration fees will be returned if applicants are not accepted; Early registration is desirable, and to encourage such action we will return the fees if a written request for cancellation of reservation is received by the Academy not later than thirty days before the opening date in September.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)