that Singleton’s failure to obtain a valid certificate required under Section 22-10-3(A) resulted in her forfeiting all claim to compensation under Section 22-10-3(C). Taos Board also argues that any financial prejudice to Singleton occurred because of her failure to comply with her statutory and contractual duties. The facts show the contrary. As determined by the State Board, Singleton had satisfied the necessary requirements to be recertified. Singleton was forced to obtain other employment at a lower salary. Under these facts, it was improper to terminate Singleton’s employment. See State ex rel. Freeman v. Sierra County Board of Education, 49 N.M. 54, 157 P.2d 234 (1945). Compare Board of Education of Alamogordo Public Schools v. Jennings, 102 N.M. 762, 701 P.2d 361 (1985) (<HOLDING>). (b) Taos Board additionally argues that
holding that a liquidated damages amount set by contract is enforceable where the amount bears a reasonable relation to the damages actually sustained holding that any constitutionally protected property interest an employee has as a result of his employment contract is satisfied by payment of the full compensation due under the contract holding that rule 10b5 damages must be offset by amount of settlement holding that an assault that occurred immediately after the employee was discharged was in the course of the employment holding that wrongfully discharged employee is entitled to damages in the amount due during the remainder of the wrongfully terminated contract offset by the amount of income which employee received from other employment during the remainder of the contract period