Everett v. Fractional School District No. 2
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kent Circuit. * The plaintiff below (who is plaintiff in error) brought his action against the school district upon a contract, alleging it to be a contract of the district, of which the following is a copy: “ It is hereby contracted between M. A. Patrick, of district No. 2, fractional, in the township of Cannon, county of Kent, and state of Michigan, and Franklin Everett, a legally qualified teacher in said township, that the said Franklin Everett shall teach the…
Read the full summary
Error to Kent Circuit. * The plaintiff below (who is plaintiff in error) brought his action against the school district upon a contract, alleging it to be a contract of the district, of which the following is a copy: “ It is hereby contracted between M. A. Patrick, of district No. 2, fractional, in the township of Cannon, county of Kent, and state of Michigan, and Franklin Everett, a legally qualified teacher in said township, that the said Franklin Everett shall teach the primary school of said district, for the term of four months, commencing on the 15th day of November, A. D. 1872; and the…
1Opinion of the CourtChristiancy, J.
We think the circuit judge rightly treated the approval *252of the moderator, and his signature thereto, at the foot of the written contract, as in legal effect a signature of the contract.
But we think he erred in the view he took of the effect of the statute {Comic. L. 1871, § 8616) upon the contract. That section, it is true, provides, among other things, that “all contracts shall be in writing, and signed by a majority of the board on behalf of the district; said contract shall specify the wages agreed upon, and shall require the teacher to Tceep a correct list of the pupils, and the age of…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Holloway v. School District No. NineMichigan Supreme Court · 1886