Bryant v. Whisenant

• Citation: 167 Ala. 325,52 So. 525
• Parties: BRYANT v. WHISENANT ET AL.
• Decision Date: 12 May 1910
• Court: Supreme Court of Alabama

52 So. 525

167 Ala. 325

BRYANT v. WHISENANT ET AL.

Supreme Court of Alabama

May 12, 1910

Appeal from City Court of Anniston; Thomas W. Coleman, Jr., Judge.

Action by Bessie Bryant, pro ami, against M. A. Whisenant and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Mayfield J., dissenting in part.

The suit was for damages alleged to have been done plaintiff on account of declining to permit her to attend a public school taught in district No. 23, in Calhoun county, of which the defendants were the district trustees. It is alleged that the defendants instructed the teacher not to receive or teach her, and that they made the rules excluding her from school. The pleas are as follows: "(2) That in, to wit, the month of October, 1908, the county board of education of Calhoun county adopted rules and regulations for public schools of Calhoun county, and amongst other rules it was provided 'that they [the district trustees of public schools] are authorized to assess and collect an incidental fee from each pupil of not less than 25 cents nor more than $1; provided that children of indigent parents may be excused from paying this fee.' And said rule of said county board of education was in force and effect on, to wit, the 15th day of February, 1909, and subsequent and prior thereto, and at the time and matters complained of in said complaint. That acting under and by authority of said rule the said defendants as such district trustees assessed an incidental fee of, to wit, 35 cents against each of the pupils attending said public school in district No. 23, in Calhoun county, and the said plaintiff was one of the pupils in said school; and on the 15th day of February, 1909, as a condition precedent to the instruction of said plaintiff, it was required by said defendants that said incidental fee be paid to the said teacher, Miss Whiteside, and the said plaintiff and her father, her next friend, failed and refused to pay such incidental fee, and thereupon, in order to enforce such rule and regulation, these trustees, defendants herein, instructed the said teacher not to hear the lessons of the plaintiff until said incidental fee was paid, and the nonpayment of the said incidental fee was the sole cause of said instruction to said teacher. These defendants say that said incidental fee of 35 cents from each pupil attending said school was strictly necessary for the purpose of providing wood and...