Legal Opinion
Richardson v. Board of Education
California Supreme Court
Decided June 23, 1936No. L. A. 15687PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
A hearing was granted in this case after decision by the District Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division One. Upon further consideration, we are satisfied that the said court has correctly determined the issues, and we accordingly adopt the opinion of Mr. Justice pro tempore Shinn as the opinion of this court. It is as follows:
“Plaintiff seeks the mandate of the court requiring respondent school district to classify him as a permanent teacher. Plaintiff’s rights are governed by his contract with the board and by section 1609, subd. 2 (e), Political Code (Stats. 1927,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Leymel v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Wood v. Los Angeles City School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- Gould v. Santa Ana High School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
3Cited by11 opinions
- Holbrook v. Board of EducationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
- Main v. Claremont Unified School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- Matthews v. Board of EducationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
- Beseman v. RemyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- Rutley v. Belmont Elementary School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.