377 F. Supp. 302 - Moore v. Knowles’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently August 1996
8 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Perry v. Sindermann · Zimmerer v. Spencer · H. L. Moore, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross v. J. C. Knowles, Defendants-Appellants-Cross · Hix v. Tuloso-Midway Independent School District
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'The tenure policy of the School District that plaintiff says was in effect, be it express, de facto or implied, would be contra to Article 2781 [the predecessor to section 23.28, Texas Education Code], and void, as it would have generated an automatic teacher contract renewal procedure, the effect of which would have resulted in a term that was not limited by three years but by the failure of the teacher to render satisfactory service.' " We continued in Burris by stating: 27 "It is clear that, under Texas law, a school district which did not adopt the continuing contract law [section 13.101, Texas Education Code] ... may not adopt its own tenure plan for teachers employed under section 23.28.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The attorney for the School District, in a letter, dated May 2, 1968, addressed to the State Commissioner of Education, stated: “The policy then and now is to reward satisfactory work by extending their (teachers’) contracts, but this has been done by action of the Board each March”. Plaintiff says that this statement is proof of a de facto tenure policy that clearly implies promise of continued employment. We do not agree. The published school board Policies in effect at all times pertinent to this appeal never expressed anything indicating that it would renew any teacher contract when it expired. . . . The mere fact that a teacher has been rehired each year for a period of years does not constitute any evidence that the School District had impliedly contracted with the teacher to renew the contract every year. Successive renewals of a teacher’s contract with admissions by school representatives that such renewals were the reward for satisfactory work does not constitute evidence of de facto tenure policy of the school district, or of any implied agreement on the part of the .'school district that - a teacher has a contractual right of renewal so long as the work performed is satisfactory. The tenure policy of the School District that plaintiff says was in effect, be it express, de facto or implied, would be contrary to Article 2781, and void, as it would have generated an automatic teacher contract renewal procedure, the effect of which would have resulted in a term that wa”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the termination or cancellation of a teacher's contract before the expiration of its term”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.