holding Tenure Act provided immunity to school officials despite their false claims of misappropriation of school funds against the plaintiff and conspiracy to testify falsely during the teacher’s administrative hearing
How later courts described this case
- holding Tenure Act provided immunity to school officials despite their false claims of misappropriation of school funds against the plaintiff and conspiracy to testify falsely during the teacher’s administrative hearing
- “When courts have implied a private right of action from a criminal statute, the statute invariably is intended to protect a particular class of people.”
- adopting factors from Cort v. Ash, 422 U.S. 66, 95 S.Ct. 2080, 45 L.Ed.2d 26 (1975)
- “willfulness, malice, or corruption”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
OPINION ON PETITION TO REHEAR
CANTRELL, Judge.
The appellant has filed a Petition to Rehear asserting that the record does not reflect that the defendant Kersey was an employee of the School Board at the time the acts complained of in the complaint took place and therefore would not be covered by the immunity granted by T.C.A. § 49-1416(9).
*107 Since the Court concludes that this is an important factor in this case bearing on one of the reasons for the previous opinion of the Court, we are of the opinion that the Petition to Rehear should be granted and the appellees should be given fifteen days in which to respond to the matters raised in the petition.
The petition is hereby granted and the appellees are given fifteen days in which to respond to the matters raised in the petition.
TODD, P. J., and CONNER, J., concur.