This artlole empowers tke Board of Regents to em- ploy and discharge presidents, prinoipals and taaohars, and to fix the salaries of persons so employed. The statutes relating to state tenchars' colleges make no other provisions relative to the emploment of teaohers, the details of employment being left to the discretion of the Board of Regents. It follows that the Board has the incidental and la- plied 'power to enter into contracts with teachers or instructors, subjeot to the rules of law governing contracts generally.

An oral contract for the employment of the

teacher from September, 1939, through June 10, 1940, inclusive, Is valid and occxlplea the saae status as a written contract in so far as its validity under substantive rules of law Is oonoerned. The fact that the statutes give the Board of Regents the power to employ and disohargs teachers does not Indicate that the Board has the authority to discharge sumaerlly a teacher with \rhom they have contracted for a given period of time. Under general rules of law relating to personal service oontraots. en employer sag not discharge his eaployee during the period of employ- ment agreed upon, except for good cause or with the consent of eaployea. See 29 Tex. Juris. 28, and authorities cited in note 10.

Grounds for dismissal of an employee which

constitute "good cause* are listed at page 30 Vol. 29 of Tezes Jurlsprudenoe, and the authorities therein cited illustrate that eaoh case is judged largely from the standpoint of the fndividual fact situation presented. If an instructor or teaoher Is found guilty of disloyalty to the advAnistrative head of the institution in whloh he is teaching, and if the disloyalty is such as rill amount to good cause for dismissal, the State vaxld be under no liability for his salary for whaterer balance of the school year remained at the time his employlaent was tsrvninated. The question of whether or not the instruotor'a disloyalty or misconduct is such as will constitute a good cause for dismirsal depends *3 Dr. Jas. G.‘Ulzer, pace 3

upon each individual oese end presents an Issue which we oannot undertake to pass upon. We men- tlon in passlug that there Is considerable dlf- ferenoa between disloyalty to the admInistrative head of the institution in whloh the instructor is teeohlng, end disloyalty to the Board of Regents, with whioh the oootreot of employment Is entered into. Questions thus arlsing properly come within the jurlsalotlon of the Board of Regents of the state teaohers' colleges, providing the action on the part of the lnstruotor or teaoher is such as till justify his lmneddate dismissal and the refusal on the part of the board to perform further the oon- tract made.

Yours vary truly RC:jm