Floyd County Bd. of Ed. v. Layne
| Decision Date | 22 October 1971 |
| Citation | 474 S.W.2d 397 |
| Parties | FLOYD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION et al., Appellants, v. Jake LAYNE et al., Appellees. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky |
W. W. Burchett, Prestonsburg, for appellants.
Joe Hobson, Paul E. Hayes, Prestonsburg, for appellees.
CULLEN, Commissioner.
This appeal is by the Floyd County Board of Education from a judgment of the Floyd Circuit Court declaring that the board could not close the twelve-grade school at Martin, Kentucky, except upon the existence of circumstances specified in a judgment of January 21, 1939, in a former action, as being the only circumstances which would authorize a closing.
The instant action was brought by a group of individuals alleging themselves to be 'citizens, residents, taxpayers, patrons, and legal voters of the Martin School District,' seeking to enjoin the construction of a consolidated school at Eastern, and to enjoin the closing of the Martin school as a part of the consolidation plan. 1 The court entered an order permitting them to maintain the action as representatives of a class, 'i.e. the citizens and residents of Martin, Kentucky' (our emphasis).
The plaintiffs pleaded that the board of education was precluded under the doctrine of res judicata from closing the Martin school, by virtue of the 1939 judgment above mentioned, which was entered in an action brought against the board of education in 1938 by a few persons who identified themselves as 'citizens, residents, taxpayers and legal white voters of Floyd County, Kentucky, and more particularly of, and within, the Martin Consolidated School District,' and who pleaded that they brought the suit 'for and on behalf of all the taxpayers of Floyd County, Kentucky, and particularly the taxpayers and patrons of Martin Consolidated School District.'
The 1939 judgment declared that the board of education and its successors in office were 'perpetually enjoined from abandoning, discontinuing, or suspending the teaching of any of the twelve grades in said school now located in the Town of Martin, and within the Martin Consolidated School District, so long as there is a sufficient number of pupil children residing within said district to meet the legal requirements for maintaining a twelve grade school, and from requiring any pupil children in said district, or any of them, in all or any of said twelve grades, to attend any school located outside of said district, all to the end that said twelve grade school now located in said Martin Consolidated School District shall continue to be maintained and operated as a twelve grade school without being disturbed.'
The circuit court in the instant action was of the opinion that the 1939 judgment was controlling of the instant action under the doctrine of res judicata. We do not agree.
We believe it is important to give full consideration to the purpose of the doctrine of res judicata and its basis in public policy.
'The doctrine of res judicata is a judicially created doctrine, which may be said to exist as an obvious rule of reason, justice, fairness, expediency, practical necessity, and public tranquillity.
Public policy, judicial orderliness, economy of judicial time, and the interest of litigants, as well as the peace and order of society, all require that stability should be accorded judgments, that controversies once decided on their merits shall remain in repose, that inconsistent judicial decisions shall not be made on the same state of facts, and that there be an end to litigation which, without the doctrine of res judicata, would be endless.' 46 Am.Jur.2d, Judgments, sec. 395, pp. 559 to 561.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jones v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
...applied so rigidly as to defeat the ends of justice." Spears v. Spears, 784 S.W.2d 605, 607 (Ky.App., 1990), citing Floyd Co. Bd. of Ed. v. Layne, 474 S.W.2d 397 (Ky., 1972). After reviewing the law on res judicata in Kentucky, the Kentucky Court of Appeals determined that "the application ......
-
Skinner v. Board of Ed. of McCracken County
...in such a manner as to use effectively and efficiently the physical facilities in the school district. See Floyd County Board of Education v. Layne, Ky., 474 S.W.2d 397 (1971); Akers v. Stephenson, Ky., 469 S.W.2d 704 (1970); Layne v. Board of Education of Floyd County, Ky., 442 S.W.2d 587 ......
-
BTC Leasing, Inc. v. Martin
...the application of res judicata in the instant appeal would be conducive to any private or public end. See Floyd County Board of Education v. Layne, Ky., 474 S.W.2d 397 (1971). As a final comment, we would also observe that res judicata is essentially a "rule of justice ... [that] is to be ......
-
Groupwell Int'l (HK) Ltd. v. Gourmet Express, LLC
...as an obvious rule of reason, justice, fairness, expediency, practical necessity, and public tranquillity." Floyd Cnty. Bd. of Ed. v. Layne, 474 S.W.2d 397, 398 (Ky. 1971) (quoting 46 Am. Jur. 2d § 395, Judgments). In order to invoke the doctrine of res judicata, a party must establish the ......