Majority
p. 798[Civ. No. 2784. Third Appellate District. November 7, 1924.] A. W. CURLEY, Appellant, v. LUCY V. RICHARDS, etc., Respondent. Edward T. Bishop, County Counsel, J. H. O’Connor, Assistant County Counsel,' and Roy W. Dowds, Deputy County Counsel, Amici Curiae in support of Appellant’s position.
Headnote
[1] School Law—County Superintendent of Schools—Employment of Teachers—Jurisdiction.—Judgments affirmed upon authority of Nielsen v. Bicharás, ante, p. 523.APPEAL from judgments of the Superior Court of Butte County. H. D. Gregory, Judge. Reversed.
The questions involved are the same as those considered in Nielsen v. Richards, ante, p. 533.
Ware & Ware for Appellant.
Wm. E. Rothe, District Attorney, and C. W. Johnson, Assistant District Attorney, for Respondent.
The questions involved in this case are the
same as those considered in Nielsen v. Richards, ante, p. 533 [ 232 Pac. 480 ]. On the authority of that ease the judgments herein are reversed, with directions to the trial court to overrule the demurrer to the petition.
A petition by respondent to have the cause heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on January 5, 1925.