Zimmerman, and Sohngen, JJ.
¶1
We concur in the first paragraph of the syllabus, but dissent from the judgment for the reason that the appellants herein were never permitted to teach in the Youngstown public schools under their continuing contracts and,, therefore, there were no teaching performances, under such contracts, upon which the board could have based determinations of disqualification existing during such time.
Download
Copy
Embed on your site
iframe Markdown Preview card Button Hover to preview · click to copy the code
Case posture Posture APPEALS from the Court of Appeals for Mahoning county.
These two cases present exactly the same questions of law for decision by this court and are, therefore, considered together. Both appellants, Mary E. Powell and Bertha Weekley, had been teachers in the city of Youngstown schools for many years to and through the school year 1940-1941. The contract of each appellant to teach the following year was not renewed by the board of education of Youngstown in the spring of 1941. Consequently each had filed an action in mandamus in the Court of Common Pleas of Mahoning county to compel the board to tender a contract, under authority of Section 7690-2 (now Section 4842-8), General Code, which provided among other things as follows:
Provided, however, that on or before September 1, 1941, a continuing contract shall be entered into by each board of education with each teacher holding a professional, permanent, or life certificate who, at the time of the passage of this act, is completing five or more consecutive years of employment by said board.
The Court of Common Pleas granted the relief prayed for by each of the appellants and ordered and directed the board of education of the city of Youngstown to enter into a contract with each appellant, in conformity with law, such contracts to be as of September 2, 1941, or within a reasonable time before or after such date.
By resolution the board followed the judgments of the court and recognized the existence of the continuing contracts in accordance therewith of both appellants. In the same resolution the board declared its intention to consider terminating the contracts and directed the superintendent of schools, George A. Bowman, to prepare for each of the appellants notice of this intention, with a full statement of the causes as they existed in June 1941. This resolution was adopted on June 1, 1942. Thereafter the board wrote to each appellant advising her of the intention of the board to consider the termination of the contract and that the grounds for such consideration were gross inefficiency and other good and just causes, which grounds were included in those set out in Section 7690-6 (now 4842-12), General Code, as causes for which the contract of a teacher might be terminated.
In each case specifications were set out. In the case of Weekley they included inability to maintain reasonable standards of discipline in the classroom, lack of ability to plan work, resulting in much waste of time and disorder, progress of pupils far below an acceptable standard, and a rather highly emotional state. In the case of Powell they included inability to adjust in recent years evidenced by the fact that since 1931 Powell had to be shifted from one school to another, having served in five different schools, and a conscious or unconscious cruelty to pupils during the last years of service.
Section 7690-6, General Code, after providing that
the contract of a teacher might not be terminated except for, inter alia , gross inefficiency or for other good and just cause, provided that a written notice of the board's intention to consider the termination of the contract, with full specifications of the grounds for such consideration, shall be furnished the teacher, and that the board may proceed with formal action to terminate the contract unless the teacher within ten days after receipt of the notice shall demand in writing a hearing before the board. The section then provided for rights with reference to such hearing, giving each party the right to be represented by counsel, to subpoena witnesses and to examine and cross-examine them under oath; and that after the hearing the board by a majority vote may either order the termination of the contract or enter an order against such termination.
Section 7690-6, General Code, further provided:
Any teacher affected by an order of termination of contract shall have the right of appeal to the Court of Common Pleas of the county in which the school is located within thirty days after receipt of notice of the entry of such order. Such appeal shall be an original action in said Common Pleas Court and shall be commenced by the filing of a petition against such board of education, in which petition the facts shall be alleged upon which the teacher relies for a reversal or modification of such order of termination of contract. Upon service or waiver of summons in said appeal, such board of education shall forthwith transmit to the clerk of said Common Pleas Court for filing a transcript of the original papers theretofore filed with said board and a certified transcript of all evidence adduced at the hearing or hearings before such board, whereupon the cause shall be at issue without further pleading and shall be advanced and heard without delay. The Common Pleas Court shall examine the
transcript and record of the hearing before the board of education and shall hold such additional hearings as it may deem advisable, at which it may consider other evidence in addition to such transcript and record.
Upon final hearing, the Common Pleas Court shall grant or deny the relief prayed for in the petition as may be proper under the provisions of this act and in accordance with the evidence adduced in the hearing. Such an action shall be deemed to be a special proceeding within the purview of Section 12223-2 of the General Code and either the teacher or the board of education may appeal therefrom.
There is no question in these cases that all provisions of Section 7690-6, General Code, with reference to the hearings before the board of education, were complied with; that after the hearings the board ordered the termination of the contracts; that thereafter each appellant appealed her case to the Common Pleas Court which affirmed the decision of the board; and that thereafter each case was appealed to the Court of Appeals which affirmed the judgment of the Common Pleas Court.
The cases are before this court upon the allowance of motions to certify the records. Source: CourtListener
Court Parallel citations 74 N.E.2d 261 35 OhioOp.2d 322 