Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AlJSTtN c. @b&D c. MANN -” .UU-. Honorable X. E. Griffin county iLttornsp Young Co-Q Graharc, iexas Dear sir: *e ere in reoeipt ot aieb you request the opinion of whether a board of aonmon oontraote with three tea&a 87erage dally attendanoe 18 You &ate thnt the ~%ehool does not have any ne e atate aid in.my nnnner.* ing such oontraets will not create a &eSici 0, Betised Civil Statutea, make croatract~ with la or their dlatriot, but they may hare settled in such dietriot ainee the seholaafie aenaue was taken, shall be entitled to receive all the benefits oi the aehool~ or such dietriot. Ia a diet-riot that levies a spedal sohool tax the truetees sh&l hare the right to fnorease the aalariee of tea&em and the scholaatle age, an(l map also have the dohoole taught longer than six aotlths, if it is deemad advisable.* Eon. '. i;:. Griffin, key 2, 1939, &ge 2 IX ;in&etou v. wmtin,.,jT.C.k. 1901) 65 :~.:..606, the court had th:s statute before it?or consideration j.ze case in which three teaci.urotea bee- hired bi:Lthe avera;e daily attendar,ce was kss than G5 pupils. Tke contract of e&ploy:.entbad been approved by the;county superictendent, but he refused to approve certain salary vouchers issued tc tbe teaaher. In holding the contract binding On the district, the court stated: "Construing together articles 3946, 3559, 3959a and 3961,,R. i:.1895 (ocw contained 10 articles 2750 k 2749, R. C. S. 3.9251,we are of opinion that the trustees are therein empowered to ascertain the existenae of the $aats rendering the employment ot assistants neoessary; that the exeroise or this power is Judicial, not minister- ial, rests solely woith them, and Is a matter with whlah the teaahers hate nothing to do. having exeralsed the power by appointing the tsaoher, the disoretlon thus .axaraiBeb oannot be disturbed or inquired into %a pro- oe&lng of thls'aort, espeol~lly 5.n view of the raot that the oouaty.superintsndent approved their aotion in this ease, ana approved the teaoher*s oontraot so made.* The governing xule on this question is analogous to that nhioh controls where the legislaturs is required to pa68 no speoial law until notioe iCgiren a6 r%quir+d by the oonetitPtion. If such a law is passed the oourts will oonolu~i~elp presume that they, la the exercise of the jadloial power thus oonferred, hare founA the preeeaee OS the Zaets whloh authorired them to ast. Of oourse; we do not mesh to say that the judloial powers of sohtil trastees is In any sense so absolute. Xi this riew of the law is aorreot, then appellaat~s wife, the teaoher Ia this oase, hail the right to aooapt the employment tendered~ and, having bouad themselves by a legal eontraot, the oounty authorltlea cannot and ought not to be heard to qusstion the ralidlty of the oontraet so made. To hold othenrlse would be to seriously oripple our publfa suhool Bydam, for teaohers would then have to asoertain at their psril the existence of the faots authorizing their appointment. Suppose the trustees hail aotuslly met and deter&ned that the average dally attendanoe had reached 85, and had oontracted with plaintiff' as they did, ana suppose she had thereafter actually taught,, but the average attendanoe of 85 had not been maintaineg.':after she began, end suppose it was aftexwards ascertainah that the average baily attendance had never at any time reaohed eight+five, and that the trustees had made an honest mistake in so finding; EOZ . &_.I:.Griffin, Ay 2, 1939, Pape 3 couid it be held, 6.sar,ysound principle, ibat x.iieteacher mist lace tke mward for--Lerservices because of this zistake?~ Lr silpposethe teacher seekinp empioymtintshould differ iith the trustees as to Che facts, and should refuse to coiltract'c2'hetrustees ro,xidthen be robbed Or this necessary discrntiou, and it would be transferred to teachers not yet in any way connected with the school. This necessary discretion n;ustbe placed soltewhere,in order to render the system efficient, and it has been distinctly placed in the board of trustees. ;$abold, thereiore, that ii:eattendance was a matter with which the teacher had nothing to do, and that the contraot made with her by the board and approved by the auperfntendent wa6 ralid." In riew of the conetruotl.on plaoed upon Article Z78Q by the oourt in the foregoing aam; you ar6 advised that valid tsaohere' contracrts may be eseouted ~by the board of trustsas of a 00m-m school district underthe faote 6tated, pmPia6a. however, that such contraots are approved by the oounty.6UpOr~t6ndant. ATTOI2MEYGEREIULOFTEXAS By ,&&.&&a&-d cs 1 c. CssmwlOk~ ASSit#tMt ccc :# ,.;..