Mason v. School District No. 14
Supreme Court of Vermont
Indebitatus Assumpsit for labor, care and diligence of the plaintiff in instructing the defendants' school. Pie a, the general issue, and trial by the court, December Term, 1846, — Redeield, J., presiding.
Read the full summary
Indebitatus Assumpsit for labor, care and diligence of the plaintiff in instructing the defendants' school. Pie a, the general issue, and trial by the court, December Term, 1846, — Redeield, J., presiding. On trial it was proved, on the part of the plaintiff, that in the latter part of October or first of November, 1845, one Samuel W, Yorke, acting as prudential committee of the defendants, employee the plaintiff to teach school in said district three months, at twelve dollars per month, — the plaintiff to commence at the usual time in December for commencing winter schools, and to teach…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Kellogg, J.
It has been urged in the argument, that the county court improperly admitted the record of the district meeting of the 27th of October, 1845, to prove the appointment of Yorke as committee for that year, by whom the plaintiff was hired as a teacher, inasmuch as it does not appear by the record, that any application *492in writing for that meeting was made to the clerk, who warned the same. This objection, we think, is unsound. It appears by the papers before us, that it was the annual meeting of the district, — a meeting which the district is by…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Chandler v. BradishSupreme Court of Vermont · 1851
- State Ex Rel. Freeling v. SullivanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
- McCulloch v. BianchiniNevada Supreme Court · 1930
- Attorney General v. DoleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1897
- School District No. 13 v. HarveySupreme Court of Vermont · 1884
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.