JUDSON B. WALKER, AS COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND J. R. HOLBROOK, J. E. SADLER AND IRA J. JOHNSTON, AS AND CONSTITUING THE BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND THE BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS A CORPORATE BODY,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, EX REL., MRS. J. S. KIRTON
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court upheld a mandamus order requiring the Board of Public Instruction of Orange County to renew a teacher's contract at her original salary rather than at a reduced rate. The court held that the Orange County Teachers Tenure Act protects tenured teachers from salary reduction except for stated grounds, and the Board cannot circumvent the Act by offering reduced-salary contracts for reasons outside its scope.
The Board of Public Instruction cannot reduce a tenured teacher's salary except on grounds recognized by the Tenure Act. A judgment for a peremptory writ of mandamus requiring renewal of the contract at the original salary is affirmed.
“It is admitted that Mrs. Kirton has completed her probationary period of employment and is entitled to re-employment under the Tenure Act.”
Establishes that Mrs. Kirton qualified as a tenured teacher with statutory re-employment rights
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMrs. J. S. Kirton completed her probationary period as principal of Lakeview High School in Orange County and became entitled to re-employment under t…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Mandamus cases and more on FLexlaw
On petition of Mrs. J. S. Kirton, alternative writ of mandamus was directed to the Board of Public Instruction of Orange County commanding it to renew her contract of employment as principal of Lakeview High School at an annual salary of $2,700.00 or show cause why they refused to do so. On final hearing, judgment for peremptory writ was granted. This appeal is from that judgment.
It appears that Orange County has a Teachers Tenure Act, Chapter 18743, Acts of 1937, which among other things provides that after a teacher has completed her probationary period of employment, she is entitled to re-employment during good behavior and competent service without reduction of salary or rank except for stated causes that are not relied on in this case.
It is admitted that Mrs. Kirton has completed her probationary period of employment and is entitled to re-employment under the Tenure Act. The Board of Public Instruction tendered her a contract of re-employment to her former position at a salary of $2,466.00 per year which she declined to accept and brought this proceeding relying on the terms of the Tenure Act and her former contracts.
So the question presented is whether or not the Board of Public Instruction can avoid the terms of the Tenure Act and compel a teacher to accept a contract of employment at a reduced salary for reasons of their choosing that are not comprehended in the Tenure Act.
The law, Section 231.36, Florida Statutes 1941, requires that teachers be certificated and that they enter into written contracts with the Board of Public Instruction for the performance of their services. The appellants attempt to give *16reasons of their own for offering Mrs. Kirton a contract at a reduced compensation but none of the reasons offered are within the terms of the Tenure Act and this is their guide in the premises. The purpose of the Tenure Act was to assure teachers in their employment during competency and good behavior. If the board can side step the Act for the reasons stated here, it becomes nothing more than a dead letter.
A contract to teach school is clothed with the same sanctity as other contracts and cannot be avoided except for grounds recognized by law. No such grounds are shown to exist in this case so the judgment appealed from is affirmed.1
Affirmed.
BUFORD, C. J., CHAPMAN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The State of Fla. upon the Relation of Walter Slater v. Smith, 142 So. 2d 767 (Fla. 1st DCA 1962)…aph (3) of Section 231.36, Florida Statutes, F.S.A. The Board is bound to act pursuant to the provisions of the Tenure Act in dealing with those holding continuing contracts. The situation here is analogous to that in Walker v. State ex rel. Kirton, 153 Fla. 14, 13 So. 2d 443 (1943), in which the Supreme Court of Florida said: “So the question presented is whether or not the Board of Public Instruction can avoid the terms of the Tenure Act and compel a teacher to accept a contract of employment at a reduc…
-
The State of Fla. Ex rel. H. J. Laney v. Judson B. Walker, 155 Fla. 41 (Fla. 1944)…standards of qualification of teachers employed in Orange County, and when these standards were obtained the act secured a tenure by such teacher against removal for unfounded, flimsy, or political reasons. In Walker, Supt. v. State ex rel. Kirton, 153 Fla. 14, 13 So. (2nd) 443, we held that the School Board of Orange County, when functioning [*43] under Chapter 18743, supra, could not reduce .the salary of a permanent tenure teacher; that the terms of the act entitled her to re-employment during good beh…