Nielsen

Nielsen v. Richards

Good Law
1924 Cal. App. LEXIS 89·69 Cal. App. 533·232 P. 480
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 7, 1924Civ. No. 2783.California4,388 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Finch, J.

The trial court sustained the respondent’s demurrer to the petition herein and entered judgment denying the petition. At the hearing on the demurrer the parties filed an agreed statement of facts and stipulated that the court might consider the same “for the purpose of deciding the above entitled matter. ’ ’ The following facts appear in such agreed statement:

C. H. Nielsen is “the duly appointed, qualified and acting county superintendent of schools of the County of Butte” and respondent is the county auditor thereof. August 31, 1923, C. H. Nielsen, as such county superintendent, and petitioner executed the following instrument:

At all times mentioned in the complaint Josie E. M. Nielsen was a duly qualified teacher, holding a certificate authorizing her to teach in the elementary and secondary schools of the state. She at once entered upon the discharge of her duties of “supervising the work of teaching in the rural schools” of the county “and ever since said date has faithfully and regularly performed each and every duty pertaining to said position, if any such position exists, and has faithfully and regularly discharged the duties and obligations” of the aforesaid agreement…

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.