Barron v. Matthews, 746.

• Decision Date: 23 May 1930
• Docket Number: No. 746.,746.
• Citation: 29 S.W.2d 451
• Parties: BARRON et al. v. MATTHEWS et al.
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

29 S.W.2d 451

BARRON et al. v. MATTHEWS et al.

No. 746.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Eastland.

May 23, 1930.

Rehearing Denied June 20, 1930.

Appeal from District Court, Dawson County; Gordon B. McGuire, Judge.

Action by W. J. Barron and others against A. W. Matthews and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiffs appeal.

Affirmed.

B. W. Patterson, of Cisco, for appellants.

Garland & Yonge, of Lamesa, for appellees.

HICKMAN, C. J.

This is a statutory action prosecuted by appellants against appellees under title 50, chapter 9, arts. 3041 et seq., R. S. 1925, contesting an election held on July 6, 1929, in the Klondike independent school district of Dawson county, to determine whether such school district should issue its bonds and levy a tax to pay the same, for the purpose of constructing and equipping a school building. The appellees are the trustees of the independent school district. Prior to the filing of the contest the results of the election had been declared by appellees in favor of the issuance of the bonds and the levying of the tax. Appellants' grounds for their contest were that certain named persons had been permitted to vote at such election, who were not qualified electors under the Constitution and statutes of this state; such voters cast their votes in favor of the issuance of the bonds and levying of the tax; and that, disregarding the illegal votes cast, the election resulted in a majority against the issuance of the bonds and levying of the tax. Appellees replied, denying appellants' claims, and charging that certain other named persons who were not qualified voters had been permitted to vote at such election, and that these voters had cast their votes against the issuance of the bonds and levying of the tax. Upon the trial the court found, after eliminating certain votes for and against such bonds, that there still remained a majority of votes in favor thereof, and entered judgment that such election was legal and binding. Appellants excepted and have duly perfected their appeal.

The controlling question of law presented is contained in appellants' proposition No. 2, which reads as follows:

"To be a `property taxpaying voter' at an election such as this, it is not sufficient that the elector have property subject to, and that the same has been rendered for taxation to the school district for the current year in which the election is held, but it is necessary that the taxes be actually paid by the voter, or that he has paid taxes due by him to the school district for the previous year, if the taxes for the current year have not become due. And it appearing in this case that J. H. Flanigan, Artie Flanigan, Gynell Hill, Perry Medford, W. D. Boatwright, Earl Boyd and G. H. Hyatt, who voted for the issuance of the bonds, had not paid any taxes to the school district for either 1928 or 1929, their votes were illegal and should have been deducted from the total of votes cast in favor of such bonds."

The facts disclose that the voters who were challenged by this proposition actually owned property, subject to taxation, within the district. Their property had been assessed for taxes for the year 1929. They were otherwise qualified voters, and the question of law presented is, were they property tax paying voters under the provision of the ...