Allen v. Trs. of Sch. Dist.

• Decision Date: 31 October 1856
• Citation: 23 Mo. 418
• Parties: ALLEN, Appellant, v. TRUSTEES OF SCHOOL DISTRICT, ETC., Respondent.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

23 Mo. 418

ALLEN, Appellant,

v.TRUSTEES OF SCHOOL DISTRICT, ETC., Respondent.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

October Term, 1856.

1. The trustees of a school district organized under the act of March 27th. 1845, can not be sued as a corporation for a debt incurred by them for the building of a school-house for the district; nor would the property, held by them as such trustees for the use of the school district, be liable to execution.

Appeal from Pike Circuit Court.

This was a suit against “the trustees of school district No. 1, T. 53, R. 3, W., in Pike county.” The petition is as follows: “Plaintiff states that the defendants, on the 15th of March, 1848, entered into a contract of that date with William Watson, to build a frame school-house on lot 273, in the town of Bowling Green, in said county, for said school district; that in that contract the said trustees promised said Watson that if he would build and erect a frame school-house on said lot, and furnish all the materials necessary for the same, of the description and specifications therein mentioned, and complete the same by the 1st of August, 1848, that they as trustees would pay him what money they then had on hand, which was about fifty dollars, and that they would also pay him the sum of two hundred dollars more, for the payment of which the trustees bound themselves and their successors in office to annually apply the annual tax to be levied in said school district, until the whole should be paid; that so soon as the school-house was completed and fit for use, the trustees were to have the use of the same, and they were from that time to pay interest on any balance of the sum of two hundred and forty dollars as should then be unpaid; and further, the trustees agreed that said Watson was to have a lien on said house for five years for the payment of said debt and interest. The plaintiff further states that the said Watson received of the trustees the fifty dollars on hand, and proceeded to get the materials and to build said school-house, and that he did in all things comply with his part of said contract to the acceptance of the trustees, who received the house and have ever since used the same; that on the 16th March, 1849, a new board of trustees received the house and contract as complete; and after that, on the 24th March, 1849, the said William Watson, for value received, assigned said contract to the plaintiff Hugh Allen, of which the trustees had due notice by said Allen and by said Watson; that on the 7th August, 1849, the trustees paid said Allen the sum of seventy dollars; that on the 24th March, 1851, the trustees paid him on said contract the sum of sixty-six dollars; that these are all the payments that have been made said Watson before the above assignment, and all that have been made said Allen since, and that the residue of said two hundred and forty dollars, with interest, is yet due and unpaid; wherefore plaintiff says that the trustees have not complied with their contract; that the annual tax in said school district was not less than about sixty-five dollars, which, if it had been collected and applied annually to the contract, would, before this, have paid off the whole debt and interest; that the trustees have hitherto failed to apply the annual tax in said school district to the payment of this debt. Plaintiff therefore asks judgment for the balance of said debt and interest, and for an order to sell school-house and lot, and if that shall not be sufficient to pay off the judgment and costs, then for an order on the trustees to raise the residue and to pay it over to the plaintiff. The plaintiff also asks for such further relief as shall seem just and proper in this behalf.”

To this petition there was a demurrer, which was sustained. Plaintiff appealed.Hunt and Broadhead, for appellant.

The only point raised on the demurrer, or decided by the court below, was that the defendants were not liable or bound by the contract of their predecessors; that one board of trustees have no power to bind their successors to pay for the building a school-house for the district. One board of trustees may bind their successors in a contract to build a school-house.

By the school law there are to be three trustees elected annually. (Chap. 4, secs. 7, 26.) The trustees act in their official name as a body corporate. (Secs. 19, 20.) They have power and it is made their duty to call meetings of the inhabitants of the district; to make out a list of the taxes assessed; to issue a warrant to collect the same; to purchase a site for a school-house, and to build a school-house thereon. (Sec. 32.) They have power to hold property and to sue in their official and corporate name (secs. 54, 71); and at the expiration of their...