Bullock v. Sanford Consol. School Dist.

Decision Date04 February 1929
Docket Number27752
Citation121 So. 267,153 Miss. 476
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
PartiesBULLOCK et al v. SANFORD CONSOL. SCHOOL DIST. [*]

Division B

Suggestion of Error Overruled April 1, 1929.

APPEAL from chancery court of Covington county, HON. T. P. DALE Chancellor.

Action between F. P. Bullock and others and the Sanford Consolidated School District. Decree for the latter, and the former appeal. Affirmed.

Decree affirmed. Suggestion of error overruled.

W. U. Corley, for appellants.

E. L Dent, for appellee.

OPINION

ETHRIDGE, P.J.

This is an appeal from the chancery court validating school funds issued by the Sanford consolidated school district. The original Sanford consolidated school district was created in 1916, and the territory then embraced in it was described and the school building located at the then site of the Sanford schoolhouse. Subsequently certain territory was released from the school district; and in 1924 an order was passed by the school board fixing the boundaries of the consolidated school district and consolidating with it certain other schools, which read as follows:

"The matter of changing the boundaries of the Sanford School district coming on for hearing, on a petition of the qualified electors of said district, asking for the elimination of all that part of sections 23, 24, 25, 26, in Township 7 North, Range 15 and Section 30, Township 7 North, Range 14 West in Covington county, Mississippi, and the board being fully advised in the premises, find, that the petition carries a majority of the qualified electors and the present district as outlined is at a loss to the district, and that it would be to the best advantage of the district to eliminate all territory embraced in said sections as prayed for. "It is therefore ordered, that said petition be and the same is hereby granted as prayed for and the boundaries of said Sanford School District, be and the same is hereby established as follows, to-wit:--Begin at the Southeast corner of Section 32, Township 6 North, Range 14 West; on county line, and run north two miles; thence east one mile to southeast corner Section 21, Township 6 North, Range 14 West; thence North three and one-half miles; thence West one-half mile; thence north one-half mile; thence West one and one-half mile; thence north one mile; thence west to Okotoma Creek, or three miles, thence in a southeastern direction with said creek to the southeast corner of Section 1, Township 6 North, Range 15 West; thence South two miles; thence West one mile; thence South one mile to Bowie Creek; thence in a southeastern direction with said Bowie Creek to the County line in Section 31, township 6 North, Range 14 West; thence east to point of beginning, and that the territory embraced within the said described boundaries be and the same is hereby declared to be the Sanford School District and the correct and legal boundaries of said District.

"M. C. SHOEMAKE.

"J. C. SUMRALL.

"J. S. WELCH."

The order of 1926 reads as follows:

"Sanford Consolidated School District, location of school building in Northwest Quarter Northwest Quarter Section 17, 6, 14. The Sanford-Rials Line and Bay Springs petition for Consolidation to be allowed and confirmed coming on for hearing on motion, the consolidation was allowed and so ordered with metes and bounds as follows: South half and Northwest Quarter, Section 4, Township 6 North, Range 14 West; all of Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 16, 17, 18, 21, 19, 20, 29; all of Section 30 East of Bowie Creek; all of Section 32, all of Section 31 East of Bowie Creek; Township 6 North, Range 14 West; Section 35 East of Okotoma Township 7 North, Range 15, West; all of Section 36, Township 7 North, Range 15 West; Section 31, Township 7 North, Range 14 West; all of Section one east of Okotoma Creek; Township 6 North, Range 15 West; all of Section 24, all of Section 25 east of Bowie Creek Township 6 North, Range 15 West, or beginning at the Southeast corner of Section 32, Township 6 North, Range 14 West, on the county line and run north two miles, thence east one mile to Southeast corner Section 21, Township 6 North, Range 14 West; thence north three and a half miles; thence west one-half mile; thence north one-half mile; thence west one and a half miles; thence north one mile; thence west to Okotoma Creek; or three miles thence in a southeastern direction with said creek to the southeastern corner of Section 1, Township 6 North, Range 15 West; thence south two miles; thence west one mile; thence south one mile to Bowie Creek; thence in a southeasterly direction with said Bowie Creek to the county line in Section 31, Township 6 North, Range 14 West; thence east to point of beginning. That the said territory embraced in said described boundaries be and the same are hereby declared the boundaries of the Sanford Consolidated School District."

In the office of the county superintendent was a map of the school district, approved by the county school board, showing the territory embraced in the Sanford consolidated school district, and the location of its schoolhouse, and this map was introduced in evidence on the hearing.

It will be noted that the order for 1924 set out is silent as to the location of the schoolhouse. In 1928, a bond issue for improvements was desired, and the board of supervisors, entertaining some doubt as to the sufficiency of the above orders made in 1924 and 1926, presented a petition to the school board praying that, if the district was not already legally created, it be so by the board, and another order was entered on the minutes of the board setting out the boundaries of the district and the sections and parts of sections embraced in such territory. But again the location of the school building was omitted from the order. These bonds were for the erection of additional buildings for the use of the school and for wagons used in transporting the pupils to and from the school. The bonds and the proceedings in connection with their issuance were sent to the state bond attorney, and certified by him to be in conformity with the law, and notice was given under the law of the proceedings, objections having been filed thereto. The record contains the proceedings had before the board of supervisors on the bond issue, including the form of the bonds.

Prior to the enactment of chapter 283, Laws of 1924, consolidated school districts were created in the same manner as any other district--by the county school board either upon its own motion or upon the petition of persons interested. By section 100 of chapter 283, Laws of 1924, it is provided:

"The county school board at any regular or at a special meeting called for that purpose, on petition of a majority of the patrons of a proposed consolidated school district may form a consolidated school district and it shall be the duty of the board to determine and to describe the boundaries thereof and to name the sections and parts of the sections composing the district and to designate the location of the schoolhouse."

The schoolhouse, as shown by the proof, remained as it was located in 1916, and has been continuously used as a school building at that place for more than twenty-two years. The appellants rely mainly upon the omission of the location of the school building in the orders of 1924 and 1926 to defeat the bond issue, depending upon the case of Board of Supervisors v. Brown, 146 Miss. 56, 111 So. 831, wherein it was held that:

"Designating the location of the schoolhouse is one of the essential requirements of the statute, which is the only authority to create the district; and, as the formation of the consolidated school district depends entirely upon the statute, the fundamental requirements thereof must be complied with, otherwise a district cannot be formed."

The orders of 1924 creating the consolidated school districts are sufficient as to the territory described, but fail to show the location of the schoolhouse therein. The district was already a consolidated school district, but the new district added certain territory to it that had formerly been embraced in it, and the maps made and approved by the school board, although not referred to in the order on the minutes creating the district, are yet on file in the superintendent's office, and are official maps showing the location of the schoolhouse. Merely changing the boundaries of a consolidated school district does not require a relocation of the school building.

The legislature, by chapter 280, Laws of 1926, passed an act ratifying proceedings undertaking to create many other consolidated school districts. Section 1 of this act reads as follows:

"Be it enacted by the legislature of the state of Mississippi, that all proceedings heretofore had and taken by the board of supervisors of any county in this state, or the school board of any county or municipality in this state, or by the board of commissioners or the board of mayor and aldermen of any municipality of this state, or by the board of commissioners of any drainage district of this state, for the creation of any consolidated school district rural separate school district, municipal separate school district, or other school district, or drainage or levee district, or other taxing district, or the proceedings or orders of any chancery court in this state for the creation of any drainage district within the state of Mississippi, be, and the same are hereby, approved, ratified and confirmed, and said district, or districts, as so organized by the orders of said boards or the decrees of said chancery court, be, and the same are hereby declared to be valid and duly organized districts as provided by the general laws of the state of Mississippi, regardless of any defect or...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • State Game and Fish Commission v. Louis Fritz Co, 33712
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • January 15, 1940
    ... ... Dick v ... Drainage and Levee Dist., 147 Miss. 783; Nugent v. Bd. of ... Levee Com'rs., 58 ... v. Washington Steamship Co., 76 Miss. 449; Bullock v ... Sandford Cons. School Dist., 153 Miss. 476; ... ...
  • State Game and Fish Commission v. Louis Fritz Co
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • January 15, 1940
    ... ... Dick v ... Drainage and Levee Dist., 147 Miss. 783; Nugent v. Bd. of ... Levee Com'rs., 58 ... v. Washington Steamship Co., 76 Miss. 449; Bullock v ... Sandford Cons. School Dist., 153 Miss. 476; ... ...
  • Yow v. Tishomingo County School Board
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • February 1, 1937
    ... ... district ... Bullett ... v. Sanford Consolidated School District, 153 Miss. 476, 121 ... So. 267; Hopewell ... Cahoon v. Scarborough, 159 ... Miss. 5, 131 So. 431; Bullock v. Sanford Consolidated ... School District, 153 Miss. 476, 121 So. 267; ... ...
  • Board of Sup'rs of Calhoun County v. Young
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • February 24, 1930
    ... ... Division A ... 1 ... SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS. School board, in creating con ... solidated ... v. Board of Supervisors, 117 So. 111 (Miss.); ... Bullock et al. v. Sanford Consolidated School District, 121 ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT