[Download] "Raymond M. Inman v. Reorganized School" by Southern District, Division Two Court of Appeals of Missouri # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Raymond M. Inman v. Reorganized School
- Author : Southern District, Division Two Court of Appeals of Missouri
- Release Date : January 26, 1991
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 63 KB
Description
The essence of the amended petition of plaintiff Raymond M. Inman is as follows. He was hired ""as a teacher"" by defendant Reorganized School District No. II of Hayti, Missouri, on January 1, 1971. He was reemployed by four annual probationary teacher's contracts and then by successive annual indefinite Teacher's Employment Contracts. On February 15, 1989, he was advised that the board discussed his reappointment as principal and that he was not reappointed for the 1989-90 school year. He alleges he was terminated in contravention of the ""Teacher Tenure Act"". §§ 168.102 to 168.130. He prayed for reinstatement, recognition of his rights under the Act and other forms of relief. The trial court sustained the defendants' motion ""to dismiss plaintiff's Amended Petition on the grounds that the Amended Petition fails to state a claim for relief."" The court sustained that motion with the finding the plaintiff's status ""is governed by Section 168.101 RSMo."" By his brief, the plaintiff contends that he was within the scope of the Teacher Tenure Act even though he was a principal from June 30, 1971, until the time of his termination. He attempts to distinguish Fuller v. North Kansas City School Dist., 629 S.W.2d 404 (Mo. App. 1981) by reason of the amendments of the definition of ""Teacher"", § 168.104(7). The defendants have joined issue and rely upon Fuller and Meloy v. Reorganized School Dist., etc., 631 S.W.2d 933 (Mo.App. 1982) and the definition of ""Permanent teacher"" in § 168.104(4). For a factual basis for the debated issue, the parties refer to allegations of the initial petition and to unverified suggestions of the parties to establish the plaintiff was employed as a principal from June 30, 1971 until his termination.