Goetz v. School-District No. 59
Can I rely on this case?
Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.
(as of 9/30/2026)
Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1900, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.
Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- Moon v. Allen (Minn. 1900)
- Glass v. St. Paul Park Carriage & Sleigh Co. (Minn. 1890)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The allegation in the complaint that the plaintiff was “a duly qualified teacher of and in the public schools of the state, ” includes the fact that he had received the certificate required by the statute, for without that fact he could not be a duly qualified teacher. The complaint differs from, that in Ryan v. School-District, 27 Minn. 433, in which there was no allegation of the receipt of the certificate, nor of any fact which included or was equivalent to the allegation of that fact. See Minn. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Morrison, 23 Minn. 308; Folsom v. County of Chisago, 28 Minn. 324.
Order affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.