Codington Co. v. Codington Co. Comrs.

• Decision Date: 19 July 1924
• Docket Number: 5186
• Parties: COUNTY OF CODINGTON, Plaintiff and respondent, v. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, Defendants and appellants.
• Court: South Dakota Supreme Court

47 S.D. 520

199 N.W. 594

COUNTY OF CODINGTON, Plaintiff and respondent,

v.

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, Defendants and appellants. South Dakota Supreme Court Appeal from Circuit Court, Codington County, SD Hon. W. N. Skinner, Judge #5186--Affirmed Loucks, Hasche & Foley, Watertown, SD Attorneys for Appellant. Daniel K. Loucks, Watertown, SD Attorney for Respondent. Opinion filed July 19, 1924

POLLEY, J.

Pursuant to proper notice theretofore given, the board of county commissioners of Codington county, at their regular January, 1920, meeting, went through the form of changing the boundary lines of the commissioner districts and redistricting the said county, as required by the provisions of section 5864, Rev. Code 1919. They made no change, however, in the boundary lines of any of the commissioner districts as they had existed prior to that time. Upon a petition signed by a sufficient number of taxpayers, as provided by section 5886, Rev. Code 1919, the state's attorney of the county took an appeal to the circuit court. The matter was tried by the circuit court and a judgment entered directing the said board to change the boundary lines of the commissioner districts and to redistrict said county in such manner that the city of Watertown should comprise two commissioner districts, and the remainder of the county into three. From this judgment and an order denying a new trial the board appeals to this court.

Two questions of practice are presented by appellant that must be disposed of before the merits of the case can be reached.

It is contended by appellant that the persons who petitioned the state's attorney to appeal from the order, of the board had no such interest in the subject-matter as entitled them to require the state's attorney to appeal from the order of the commission. With this contention we do not agree. Section 5886 provides:

"That any states attorney, upon written demand of at least seven taxpayers of the county, shall take an appeal from any action of the board of county commissioners, when such action relates to the interests or affairs of the county at large or any portion thereof, in the name of the county, when he deems it to the interest of the county so to do."

That the state's attorney deemed it to the interest of the county to take the appeal is not denied; and that the matter involved relates to the interest and affairs of the entire county is too plain to admit of any question.

It is next contended that this is a matter upon which the action of the board is final, and that the order appealed from is not subject to review by the circuit court on appeal. What acts of a board of county commissioners can be reviewed by the courts and the manner in which they can be brought on for review has been the subject of much discussion by this and other courts. Hoyt v. Hughes County, 142 N.W. 471; Austin v. Eddy, 172 N.W. 517; Yankton County v. Board, 192 N.W. 179. But we believe no difficulty should be experienced in that regard...