Eureka Teacher's Assn. v. Board of Education

Good Law
1988 Cal. App. LEXIS 590·202 Cal. App. 3d 469·247 Cal. Rptr. 790
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 24, 1988A039170California2,381 words

Opinion

Opinion

King, J.

In this case we hold that (1) a substitute teacher’s illusory classification as a day-to-day substitute despite her actual service as a long-term substitute did not deprive her of reemployment rights conferred on long-term substitutes, and (2) her request for backpay and fringe benefits was incidental to her mandamus action for reemployment and thus was not subject to the Tort Claims Act.

The Board of Education of the Eureka City Schools (the Board) appeals from a judgment in favor of The Eureka Teacher’s Association (the Teacher’s Association) and Dian Moehnke granting a writ of mandate requiring the Board to employ Moehnke with retroactive probationary status. The Teacher’s Association and Moehnke cross-appeal, challenging a portion of the judgment denying Moehnke’s claim for backpay and fringe benefits. We reverse the portion of the judgment denying backpay and fringe benefits, and affirm in all other respects.

Moehnke served as a substitute and temporary teacher for the Eureka city schools during the entire 1983-1984 school year. She taught a fourth-fifth grade combination class in place of Anna McFarland, who was on maternity leave from September 9 to December 2…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.