Mississippi Code

Miss. Code Ann. § 37-9-15 (2026)

Selection of assistant superintendents and principals; interim conservators

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaMiss. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

No later than February 15 of each year, the superintendent of each school district, or such other person designated or authorized by the school board, shall recommend to the school board thereof the assistant superintendents and principals to be employed for each of the schools of the districts except in the case of those assistant superintendents and principals who have been previously employed and who have a contract valid for the ensuing scholastic year. Unless good reason to the contrary exists, the school board shall approve and authorize the employment of the assistant superintendents and principals so recommended. If, for any reason, the school board shall decline to approve an assistant superintendent or principal so recommended, the superintendent or the board's designee shall make additional recommendations for the place or places to be filled.

When the assistant superintendents and principals of the schools have been recommended and approved as provided in the preceding paragraph, the superintendent of such district shall enter into proper contracts with them. At a subsequent meeting he shall report same to the school board and such shall be entered in the minutes.

An interim conservator appointed pursuant to the provisions of Section 37-17-6(15)(a) shall not be required to comply with the time limitations prescribed in this section for recommending and employing assistant superintendents and principals.

Codes, 1942, §§ 6282-05, 6282-06; Laws, 1953, Ex Sess, ch. 20, §§ 5, 6; Laws, 1960, ch. 300, § 2; Laws, 1976, ch. 349; Laws, 1981, ch. 499, § 4; Laws, 1986, ch. 492, § 67; Laws, 1993, ch. 562, § 4; Laws, 1996, ch. 302, § 3, eff. 3/4/1996.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1989–2016 · leading case: Ford v. Holly Springs Sch. Dist., 665 So. 2d 840 (Miss. 1995).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Ford v. Holly Springs Sch. Dist., 665 So. 2d 840 (Miss. 1995). · cites it 6× “Ford appealed this adverse decision to the Marshall County Chancery Court on grounds that the decision was not supported by substantive evidence, and that the notice of contract nonrenewal was not issued to or received by him within the time and manner required by Miss. Code…”

Sharita Giles v. Shaw Sch. Dist., 203 So. 3d 1165 (Miss. Ct. App. 2016). “” Miss. Code Ann. § 37-9-15 (Rev. 2013). As previously stated, the Board had a valid educational reason for not renewing Giles’s contract.”

McKnight v. Mound Bayou Pub. Sch. Dist., 879 So. 2d 493 (Miss. Ct. App. 2004). “Miss.Code Ann. § 37-9-15 (Rev.2001). McKnight did not have either of those positions.”

United States v. Mississippi, 725 F. Supp. 307 (N.D. Miss. 1989). “Miss.Code Ann. § 37-9-15. Both Thomas and Murphy, the white applicant who was hired, had AA certificates.”

Gardner v. Coffeeville Sch. Dist., 982 F. Supp. 1221 (N.D. Miss. 1997). “Miss.Code Ann. §§ 37-9-15, -17 and -105 (1996).”

United States v. State of Miss., 725 F. Supp. 307 (N.D. Miss. 1989). “Miss.Code Ann. § 37-9-15. Both Thomas and Murphy, the white applicant who was hired, had AA certificates.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.