Botkin v. Osborne

Citations

• 39 Ill. 101

Syllabus

<p>1. School laws of 1849 and 1855—repealed. The acts of 1849 and 1855, in relation to schools, are, in terms, repealed by the school law of 1857.</p> <p>2. Teacher—must exhibit certificate of qualification, under act of '857. A teacher under the proviso in the act of 1857, unless he obtain the requisite certificate of qualification, and exhibits it to the school directors, before his employ, ment, is not entitled to any portion of the school fund.</p> <p>3. Same—effect of act of 1865 in that respect. The act of February 16,1865, in relation to schools, contains nothing in conflict with the act of 1857, in respect to the exhibition of a certificate by the teacher.</p> <p>4. Pleading—declaration by a teacher against school directors. In an action by a teacher against the school directors, under the act of 1857, the declaration must aver that the proper certificate of qualification was exhibited to the board of directors prior to his employment, or the action will fail. The omission to make such an averment, will not be cured by the verdict.</p> <p>5. Same—declaration for money out of a public fund. When a party seeks to draw money from a public fund, under the provisions of a law controlling its disbursement, he must, by the necessary averments, bring his case within its provisions.</p> <p>6. Parties—in suit against school directors—mode of description. Where a suit was instituted against the individual directors of a school-district, but described them as a body politic and corporate, and also gave their corporate name: Held, that such action was not improperly brought. In such case, the individual names are regarded as surplusage.</p> <p>7. Execution—whai character of writ can he awarded against school directors. A judgment against school directors can only be enforced in the mode provided by section forty-nine of the act of 1857; and an order hy the court for a general execution to issue on such a judgment, is erroneous.</p>