Wool v. Hubbell

Headnote

School teacher —contract foi' services of— Trustees of school district — action of Board of — evidence of — what sufficient to go to a jury.

Appeal from a judgment in favor of the defendant, on a nonsuit at the Circuit. The action was brought to recover upon contract,

for services as school teacher at the contract-price; the plaintiff alleging a contract, an offer to perform and continued readiness on her part, expiration of the time of engagement and failure to pay by the defendants. The contract was denied by the defendants. A contract was originally made in September between the plaintiff and the defendant Hubbell, for the hiring of the plaintiff to teach their school for the winter term at one dollar a day, or five dollars a week, which was invalid because only one of three trustees was a party to it, and the trustees could only act as a body. At a meeting in November such contract was reported to the other trustees, when Hubbell then told them that he had hired plaintiff to teach the school, and agreed with her upon the price and time. Graves was opposed to the hiring. Hubbell was in favor of it, and Backman said in effect, I shall agree with Hub-bell in hiring plaintiff. Hubbell then said: “ Then the question is settled there is no use of more talk.” The next morning Hubbell saw plaintiff’s husband, and told him they should consider his wife engaged to teach the winter school, and to tell her so, which was done.

Held, that, treating this testimony in the light most favorable to plaintiff— as the court were bound to do on a motion for a nonsuit — there was evidence from which a valid contract might fairly be inferred, and so it became a question of fact for the jury, and should have been submitted.