Gleason v. University of Minnesota
| Decision Date | 29 May 1908 |
| Docket Number | 15,685 - (192) |
| Citation | 116 N.W. 650,104 Minn. 359 |
| Parties | JOHN L. GLEASON v. UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA and Others |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Petition to the district court for Hennepin county, upon relation of John L. Gleason, for a writ of mandamus commanding the Board of Regents of the University of Minnesota to reinstate the relator as a student in the department of law. From an order, Frederick V. Brown, J. overruling a demurrer to the petition, defendants appealed. Affirmed.
University of Minnesota.
The Board of Regents of the State University are by section 4, art. 8, of the constitution, and by section 1470, R.L. 1905, constituted a body corporate under the name of the University of Minnesota.
Board of Regents.
Such board is by law exclusively vested with the management of all the educational affairs of the institution, and the courts of the state have no jurisdiction to control its discretion; but, if the board refuses to perform any of the duties imposed upon it by law, mandamus will lie to compel it to act.
Registration of Student.
Upon the face of the petition a prima facie case is stated that the relator was entitled to registration as a student of the University.
Edward T. Young, Attorney General, Chas. S. Jelley, Assistant Attorney General, and Geo. W. Peterson, Assistant Attorney General, for appellants.
Geo. B. Leonard and John P. Devaney, for respondent.
Appeal by the state from an order of the district court overruling the state's demurrer to relator's petition for a writ of mandamus commanding the Board of Regents of the University of Minnesota to reinstate the relator as a student in the department of law, with all the privileges incident thereto.
The petition sets forth in considerable detail the several territorial and congressional acts, and the constitution, bearing upon the origin and history of the university and states: That the relator is a resident of Hennepin county, and was born in the city of Minneapolis in 1883. That in the fall of 1902 he passed the examination and was admitted as a student to the university, enrolled in the department of science, literature, and the arts, and for three years continued to be a student in that department. That in the fall of 1905 he was duly enrolled as a student of the law department, and continued as such until the close of the school year in June, 1907. September 25, 1907, he presented himself to the registrar for the purpose of registering as a student in the department of law for the ensuing term, and requested a statement of the amount of fees necessary. That he was thereupon handed a copy of a resolution to the effect that he had been dropped as a student for deficiency in his work, charged with certain insubordinate acts towards the faculty. That he requested the registrar to be allowed to register in some department other than that of law, and was informed that his registration in any department of the university would not be considered. The petition alleges that the resolution was adopted by the executive committee of the Board of Regents, without any notice to relator and without giving him a hearing; that the action of the executive committee was due to prejudice and personal feeling against the relator; that the meeting was wholly ex parte, and that no evidence whatever was taken; that relator had not violated any rule or law of the university.
The first question raised by the demurrer is whether the regents are amenable to an action of this character. Chapter 28, Ter. St. 1851, contains the original act establishing the University of Minnesota. By section 7 the regents, and their successors in office, were constituted a body corporate under the name and style of the "Regents of the University of Minnesota," with the right as such of suing and being sued, of contracting and being contracted with, of making and using a common seal, and altering the same at pleasure. The same act provided that the university should be divided into certain departments, conferred certain powers on the regents, and provided that the proceeds of all lands that might be granted by the United States to the territory for the support of the university should be and remain a perpetual fund, to be called the "University Fund," the interest of which should be appropriated to its support. Section 4, art. 8, of the constitution, reads:
As early as 1862 this court had occasion to determine the powers of the Board of Regents, under the act of 1851, in the case of Regents of the University v. Hart, 7 Minn. 45 (61), and it was held that the Board of Regents constituted a public corporation, having power to contract indebtedness and to be subject, within the limitations imposed by the act, to suits at law brought to enforce their obligations. We are not aware that the question has ever been directly raised since that decision. The legal status of the Minnesota State Agricultural Society, as defined in Berman v. Minnesota State Agricultural Society, 93 Minn. 125, 100 N.W. 732, is radically different from that...
To continue reading
Request your trial