Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

589 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN -CL- -- Dr. Jae. G. Ulmr, Prrsldont Boar4 of Ragcurt State TMahara Collegrsof Tsras DrimkillHot.1 Aurtla,Texas Dear sir: Gpfnlon80. O-1735 r 16 smmarily his- lability, If any, of ln8truotor*r6alary e ash001 year remaina cuetom Ln th5.srupposltitiou8 presidentsof the rerious0au- bloas undekrthe juriedfcrtlon 0r snts to nominateth6ir houltf at a regularBoard mesting,ana the aooeptror rejrot8their mmlna- tiona. There lm no writtsn contraat onterm in- to batiwn the institutionand thr instruotora however,ft ir nndsrrtoodthst the iastqaotoris being ragloyedfor the ourront school ya~.~ ~sbfoh 261.7 or the ~arilrsP civil 8tabutaro? 1929 the proridorr authority and flrar Ohs &atlas of the Board Of 590 Dr. Jas. C. W.mer, page 2 Pegants of the state teachers' colleges of Texas. This artlole empowers tke Board of Regents to em- ploy and dischargepresidents,prinoipals and taaohars, and to fix the salaries of persons so employed. The statutes relating to state tenchars' colleges make no other provisionsrelative to the emploment of teaohers, the details of employment being left to the discretion of the Board of Regents. It follows that the Board has the incidentaland la- plied 'powerto enter into contracts with teachers or instructors,subjeot to the rules of law governing contracts generally. An oral contract for the employmentof the teacher from September, 1939, through June 10, 1940, inclusive,Is valid and occxlpleathe saae status as a written contract in so far as its validity under substantiverules of law Is oonoerned. The fact that the statutes give the Board of Regents the power to employ and disohargs teachers does not Indicate that the Board has the authority to discharge sumaerlly a teacher with \rhomthey have contracted for a given period of time. Under general rules of law relating to personal service oontraots. en employer sag not discharge his eaployeeduring the period of employ- ment agreed upon, except for good cause or with the consent of eaployea. See 29 Tex. Juris. 28, and authorities cited in note 10. Grounds for dismissal of an employee which constitute"good cause* are listed at page 30 of Vol. 29 of Tezes Jurlsprudenoe,and the authorities therein cited illustratethat eaoh case is judged largely from the standpoint of the fndividualfact situation presented. If an instructoror teaoher Is found guilty of disloyalty to the advAnistrative head of the institutionin whloh he is teaching, and if the disloyalty is such as rill amount to good cause for dismissal, the State vaxld be under no liability for his salary for whaterer balance of the school year remained at the time his employlaent was tsrvninated.The question of whether or not the instruotor'adisloyalty or misconduct is such as will constitutea good cause for dismirsal depends Dr. Jas. G.‘Ulzer, pace 3 upon each individualoese end presents an Issue which we oannot undertake to pass upon. We men- tlon in passlug that there Is considerabledlf- ferenoa between disloyalty to the admInistrative head of the institutionin whloh the instructoris teeohlng, end disloyalty to the Board of Regents, with whioh the oootreot of employment Is entered into. Questions thus arlsing properly come within the jurlsalotlonof the Board of Regents of the state teaohers' colleges, providing the action on the part of the lnstruotoror teaoher is such as till justify his lmneddate dismissal and the refusal on the part of the board to perform further the oon- tract made. Yours vary truly RC:jm