Pearson v. School District Number 8 of Greenfield
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of tbe circuit court for Milwaukee county: W. J. TurNer, Circuit Judge. This action was brought to recover damages for breach of contract. The plaintiff was a duly qualified teacher in Milwaukee county, Wisconsin, and the defendant a duly organized school district.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of tbe circuit court for Milwaukee county: W. J. TurNer, Circuit Judge. This action was brought to recover damages for breach of contract. The plaintiff was a duly qualified teacher in Milwaukee county, Wisconsin, and the defendant a duly organized school district. The plaintiff’s complaint is based upon an alleged contract with the defendant to teach its school for one year and that the defendant breached the contract, in consequence of which plaintiff sustained damages. The defendant claims that the contract was void because not in writing. The jury returned the…
1DissentMabshall, J.
In my judgment the con•clusion reached in this case is clearly wrong.
At the outset it is conceded that the validity of the contract *624depends on whether the statute was strictly followed. That concession was unavoidable since this court, in terms or effect,, has so held, notably in McNolty v. Board of School Directors, 102 Wis. 261, 78 N. W. 439. There it was held that school district officers can only make a valid contract with a teacher-by complying strictly with the statute. That was later emphasized in Manthey v. School Dist. 106 Wis. 340, 82 N. W. 132, the court adjudging a contract, so…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- McDonald v. Mayor of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Head & Amory v. Providence Ins. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1804
- Aurora Water Co. v. City of AuroraSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
- Stuart v. City of CambridgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
- Crutchfield v. City of WarrensburgMissouri Court of Appeals · 1888
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.