Legal Opinion

Tate v. Westerville City Board of Education

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 4, 1983No. 82-1406PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, J.

The issue presented is whether the automatic renewal provision of R.C. 3319.11 applies to supplemental teaching contracts. R.C. 3319.11 states in part:

“Any teacher employed under a limited contract, and not eligible to be considered for a continuing contract, is, at the expiration of such limited contract, deemed re-employed under the provisions of this section at the same salary plus any increment provided by the salary schedule unless the employing board * * * gives such teacher written notice of its intention not to reemploy him on or before the thirtieth day of April. * * *”

A board of…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. State ex rel. Peake v. Board of Education of the South Point Local School DistrictOhio Supreme Court · 1975

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Hara v. Montgomery County Joint Vocational School DistrictOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. State ex rel. Dennis v. Board of Education of Hillsdale Local School DistrictOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Kehoe v. Brunswick City School District Board of EducationOhio Court of Appeals · 1983
  4. Hara v. Montgomery Cty. Joint Vocational School Dist.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996
  5. State Ex Rel. Fraysier v. Bexley City School District Board of EducationOhio Court of Appeals · 1989

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API