Dohrenwend v. Board of Ed. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Town of Scarsdale

• Decision Date: 16 March 1962
• Citation: 227 N.Y.S.2d 505
• Parties: Application of Constance DOHRENWEND and Gertrude Wetzel, Petitioners, for an order under Article 78 of the Civil Practice Act, v. The BOARD OF EDUCATION OF UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1 OF the TOWN OF SCARSDALE, New York, and The Westchester Committee for the Freedom Riders, Respondents.
• Court: New York Supreme Court

Page 505

227 N.Y.S.2d 505

Application of Constance DOHRENWEND and Gertrude Wetzel,

Petitioners, for an order under Article 78 of the

Civil Practice Act, v. The BOARD OF EDUCATION OF UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1

OF the TOWN OF SCARSDALE, New York, and The

Westchester Committee for the Freedom

Riders, Respondents.

Supreme Court, Westchester County.

March 16, 1962.

William A. Egan, Jr., New York City, for petitioners.

Arthur M. Moritz, New York City, for respondent Westchester Committee for the Freedom Riders.

Benjamin Burstein, White Plains, for respondent.

JOHN J. DILLON, Justice.

This is an Article 78 proceeding in which the Court is asked to compel the Board of Education of Union Free School District No. 1 of the Town of Scarsdale to revoke a permit issued to the Westchester Committee for the Freedom Riders for the purpose of conducting a concert or benefit in the auditorium of the Scarsdale High School. The Petitioners are residents and taxpayers of the school district. The proceeding was instituted only against the Board of Education but the licensee has been joined as a Respondent by stipulation.

The application is based chiefly on the proposition that the permit was issued in violation of Section 414, Subd. 4 of the Education Law, in which a board of education is empowered to permit the use of a school building 'for meetings, entertainments and occasions where admission fees are charged, when the proceeds thereof are to be expended for an educational or charitable purpose.' It is undisputed that admission fees are to be charged for the proposed meeting, and the question presented is whether the proceeds are to be expended for an educational or charitable purpose. It appears from the answers and affidavits submitted by both Respondents, and it is not substantially disputed, that the proceeds of the meeting will be used as a legal defense fund for the Freedom Riders. The Court may take judicial notice of the fact that the 'Freedom Riders' are a group of persons participating in organized protests against racial discrimination in various parts of the country and that in a number of instances members of such groups have been subjected to criminal prosecution. The licensee says that the funds to be raised at this meeting will be channelled through another organization known as the Congress of Racial Equality ('Core') which will act as a disbursing agent in the defense of persons so arrested or imprisoned. It is important to keep in mind...