Maryland Reports; Cases Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Maryland Volume 43 (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1877 edition. Excerpt: ...imposed upon all teachers; and is one from which the principal is not exempt, for he is a teacher, elected for that purpose, exclusively; the law does not contemplate any such officer as principal with duties other than those of teacher. Of course the duty of making the report is" one which from its nature, cannot be performed except by those who are actually engaged in teaching, which as it appears from the proof, formed no part of the appellee's occupation during the time he held the oflice of principal. The second prayer of the appellants which was intended to present the question of the appellee's duty under the Act of 1872; contained several matters of which it does not appear there was any evidence, such as the notice or knowledge of the appellee of the contents of the Public School Directory for Allegany County. This does not appear to form a material part of the legal proposition which the prayer was intended to raise. But as there was no evidence to prove such knowledge on the part of the appellee, it was not error to reject the prayer. The second ground of defence relied on by the appellants, was that the appellee did not perform any services as teacher and therefore was not entitled to recover under the pleadings. This point is raised by the appellants' third prayer, which was refused as asked, but granted with the following modification: " That if the jury find that the plaintiff was discharged from the service of the defendants without giving thirty days notice to him thereof, then he may recover under the pleadings in this case, for the services actually rendered by him prior to such discharge." And the Court afterwards during the argument of counsel before the jury, stated the same...