Court Opinion

ID: 9742539
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 21:15:37.042525+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:33.386688
License: Public Domain

WOLLMAN, Justice
(dissenting).
If appellant’s suit is treated as one seeking review of the merits of his termination, then I agree that the remedy would be by way of appeal under SDCL 13-46-1 and 13-43-10.1. If, however, the case is viewed as one brought to enforce the automatic contract renewal provisions of SDCL 13-43-10, as I think it must be, then appellant proceeded properly in bringing a *591mandamus action since he was not seeking review of the Board’s decision or purported action, but rather was seeking to compel the performance of an act — the formal tendering of a contract for the following school year — required to be performed by the Board as a consequence of its failure to give appellant the notice required by SDCL 13-43-9.1.