Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Johnson v. Board of Education, 419 P.2d 52.

34 citing documents.

Richard Anderson v. Valley Union High School District 22 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Richard Anderson v. Valley Union High School District 22 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
of Educ., 101 to the view that teachers are permitted jury trials when they cast their disciplinary grievances as contract disputes and invoke the superior court‘s jurisdiction over such matters.
Winters v. Arizona Board of Education 83 P.3d 1114 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Winters v. Arizona Board of Education 83 P.3d 1114 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Winters contends that the Board’s decision was not supported by substantial evidence because it improperly relied on all five incidents, when the prosecutions in three of the five incidents were dismissed prior to an adjudication.
Orme School v. Reeves 802 P.2d 1000 Ariz. 1990
Orme School v. Reeves 802 P.2d 1000 Ariz. 1990
11 See Aaron Ferer & Sons, Ltd. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, 731 F.2d 112 (2d Cir. 1984); Anderson v. Phillips Petroleum Co., 861 F.2d 631 (10th Cir.1988); Heth v. Del Webb’s Highway Inn
United Bank of Arizona v. Allyn 805 P.2d 1012 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
United Bank of Arizona v. Allyn 805 P.2d 1012 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1990
See, , Heth v. Del Webb’s Highway Inn, , (setting forth directed verdict standard).
Wheeler v. Yuma School District No. One 750 P.2d 860 Ariz. 1988
Wheeler v. Yuma School District No. One 750 P.2d 860 Ariz. 1988
Considering the unequivocal legislative history of the 1977 amendments to the current §§ 15-536(B) and 15-538(A), , that the purpose of the Teachers’ Tenure Act is simply to give teachers sufficient notice if they are not to be rehired so that they can seek other suitable positions.
Britt v. Red Mesa Unified School District No. 27 748 P.2d 1202 Ariz. 1987
Britt v. Red Mesa Unified School District No. 27 748 P.2d 1202 Ariz. 1987
Cooner v. Board of Education 663 P.2d 1002 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Cooner v. Board of Education 663 P.2d 1002 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
Rottenberg v. Cartwright School District, 22 Ariz.App.
Rottenberg v. Cartwright School District No. 83 528 P.2d 859 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1974
Rottenberg v. Cartwright School District No. 83 528 P.2d 859 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1974
v. Hopkins, , , , *476 School District No. 8, , ; and Indian Oasis School District No. 40 v. Zambrano, 22 Ariz.App.
Indian Oasis School District No. 40 & Board of Trustees v. Zambrano 526 P.2d 408 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1974
Indian Oasis School District No. 40 & Board of Trustees v. Zambrano 526 P.2d 408 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1974
We agree with the trial court that termination of the 1969-70
Flowing Wells School District v. Stewart 499 P.2d 750 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
Flowing Wells School District v. Stewart 499 P.2d 750 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
appellants maintain that no hearing is required prior to giving notice under A.R.S.
Kaufman v. Pima Junior College Governing Board 484 P.2d 244 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1971
Kaufman v. Pima Junior College Governing Board 484 P.2d 244 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1971
A PRIOR HEARING AND THE “COMMON LAW” Appellant cites the following cases for the proposition that he is entitled to a hearing prior to termination of his contract: , ; , Public School District No. 11 v. Holson, , 252 P. 509 (1927).
Economy v. Frohme 474 P.2d 836 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
Economy v. Frohme 474 P.2d 836 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1970
Palicka v. Ruth Fisher Sch. Dist. No. 90 of Maricopa County 473 P.2d 807 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Palicka v. Ruth Fisher Sch. Dist. No. 90 of Maricopa County 473 P.2d 807 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
operative contract cannot be dismissed from that contract except for good cause: “In their [probationary teachers] case, if their contract is not be be renewed, only the proper notice is required, and the Board need not show ‘good cause’, but if they are discharged from a currently operative contract they ‘cannot be discharged except for good cause after hearing.’ ”
Cano v. Neill 473 P.2d 487 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Cano v. Neill 473 P.2d 487 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
To like effect, , -315 , and cases cited therein.
Carlson v. SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 6 OF MARICOPA CTY. 468 P.2d 944 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Carlson v. SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 6 OF MARICOPA CTY. 468 P.2d 944 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1970
Board of Education, Tucson High School District No. 1 v. Williams, supra.
Reeves v. ARIZONA AGGREGATE ASS'N HEALTH & WELF. F. 435 P.2d 829 Ariz. 1967
Reeves v. ARIZONA AGGREGATE ASS'N HEALTH & WELF. F. 435 P.2d 829 Ariz. 1967
After construing the evidence most favorably for defendant, , , it is our considered opinion that reasonable minds could differ on the inferences to be drawn therefrom.
School District No. 8, Pinal County v. Superior Court 433 P.2d 28 Ariz. 1967
School District No. 8, Pinal County v. Superior Court 433 P.2d 28 Ariz. 1967
and pointed out that the tenure act contemplates that a continuing teacher, one whose contract has been renewed for four consecutive years, is entitled to a hearing before discharge and that there must always exist good cause for the notice of termination.