The Virginia enterprise. [volume] (Virginia, St. Louis County, Minn.) 1893-19??, 1913-10-03
Ida q. Henry Flies Suit for
Breach Of Contract
J u. This Week. ..: II. j:
OUTCOME WILL BE N -. +. 1. !.
WATCHED WITH INTEREST
Teacher Dismissed BY Board During
August After Application Blanks
Had Been Forwarded and Filled
- .@'-
Out Brings Interesting Test Case.

ent III tAe uAlnS VI suit against Tie
board of education of the 1ndepen-
dent school district of Virginia by Ida
E. Henry for salary due during the
month of September. Miss Henry
was one of the teachers dismissed by
he board shortly after its organiza-
ton following the annual election, for
the reason, it is alleged, that she
would be out of harmony with the new
administration. Marion o. West, J.
M. Partridge and Miss Glenn and other
teachers were dismissed in the same
manner. The complaint in the case
of Miss Henry was served upon the
school board officers the first Of the
week, by her attorneys, Judge R. J.
Montague and Henry ]. Merdink.
It alleges substantially that for
more than two years prior to April,
1913, the plaintiff was one of the duly
elected and qualified teachers of the
public schools of Virginia, that at the
end of the last year, in accordance
with the usual custom she received
an application blank from Superinten-
dent of Schools Lafayette Bliss with
instructions to fill it out, which she
did.
From the application blank it ap-
pears that Miss Henry is a graduate
of the high school Of Aitkin, MIMI,
holding a state first grade teachers
certificate, and that she has had six
years experience as teacher.
Further it is represented that she
was one of the teachers recommended
for reelection on the staff of the To-
cal schools by a resolution of the
school board at its meeting of April
8, 1918.
On April II she received the usual
notice from the school board notify
ing her of her election to the place
by resolution b 6r the pdar ii s1-
ary of $85 a month for period OF
ten months. The resolution required
that she should file her acceptance on
or before April Is, 1918. Miss Henry
filed her acceptance on April rs. Then
follows copy Of letter from Clerk
Mitchell Stewart, notifying Miss
Henry of her election as teacher.
Early in August Miss Henry was
notified that her services would not
be required during the present year.
Further the complaint states that
the plaintiff made application in good
faith, that her qualifications were well
known to the members Of the school
board and that her work had been
satisfactory. It is further declared
that following the notice the plaintiff
depended upon securing a position
here and made no effort to secure an
other place and that by reason Of this
condition she was deprived Of accept
ing employment in other schools OF
the state.
At the opening Of the present term
Of school Miss Henry reported FOR
work and was refused an assignment
and she was informed that the board
of education had decided that no as
signment would be made for her and
that she would not be recognized as
teacher during the coming year.
Since that time she has held her
self in readiness to serve the school
district under the terms of her con-
tract and has notified the superinten-
dent and clerk Of the school board OF
her address and informed them that
she was ready and willing at any
time to take up her duties, but that
all such offers were refused.
She alleges that on the 26th day Of
September she was entitled to he,
salary of $85 month and the suit il
brought to recover it. The answer a
the school board has not yet been filed
If the case of Miss Henry is decided
favorably to her, the actions of the
other teachers on substantially thu
same grounds, will be filed immedi'
ately.
There is general interest in the city
lin the outcome and the case is being
watched over the state as well as thu
lpoint raised is one on which there