Legal Opinion · Dissent

Lindros v. Governing Board of the Torrance Unified School District

California Supreme Court

Decided May 31, 1973No. L.A. 30059Published

1DissentBurke, J.

I dissent. The majority have wholly emasculated the provisions of section 13443, subdivision (d), of the Education Code which, until now, assured that a local school board’s decision as to the sufficiency of the cause for failing to reemploy a probationary teacher was conclusive and free from judicial interference. The “cause” which led defendant district to refuse to reemploy Lindros was his classroom use of improper, indecent language. Since the use of such language in a tenth-grade classroom obviously is a matter of relating to “the welfare of the schools and the pupils thereof . . .” (Ed.…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Cohen v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Griggs v. Board of TrusteesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
  3. Palo Verde Unified School District v. HenseyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
  4. Feist v. RoweCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
  5. American Federation of Teachers v. San Lorenzo Unified School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API