Francis v. Jones

MARKS, Acting P. J.

Appellant is, and was at all times herein mentioned, the holder of a certificate entitling her to teach in the high schools of the state of California. The Victor Valley Union High School District was a district that employed more than eight teachers under a principal who devoted more than two hours per day to supervision in the school under his control. Walker Jones, L. V. Robinson, R. J. Mills, James M. Holloway, and T. A. Lee were trustees of this district.

Appellant was employed as a teacher in the district from 1922 to the end of the school term in 1927, and became a permanent teacher of such district under the provisions of section 1609 of the Political Code. On May 7, 1927, the board of trustees passed a resolution terminating the employment of each teacher in the high school effective June 30, 1927, the end of the school year.

On August 20, 1927, appellant informed the trustees of the district that she was ready and willing to discharge her duties as a teacher and asked them to inform her of the date upon which the school would open. Under date of August 23, 1927, appellant acting through Messrs. Fall & Fall, her attorneys, informed the trustees by letter that she was ready, willing and able to teach in the high school during the ensuing school year and requested that she be in

[109]

formed when she could enter upon the performance of her duties. It does not appear from the record that respondents replied to either of these communications. Under date of February 17, 1928, Messrs. Fall & Fall, as attorneys for appellant, wrote a letter to the board of trustees of the district, in which they requested the payment of the salary of appellant from the commencement of the school year in 1927. They received no reply to this letter, and suit was instituted in the court below whereby appellant sought a writ of mandate requiring respondents to reinstate her in her position as a permanent teacher, and directing the drawing of warrants in her favor for the salary which had accrued during the school year 1927-1928. It was stipulated at the trial of this case that no charges were filed against appellant as required by section 1609 of the Political Code, nor was she given any hearing by the board of trustees of the district prior to her purported dismissal. After proof of the foregoing facts the trial court granted respondents’ motion to dismiss appellant’s petition. This had the same effect as a judgment of nonsuit.