Haines v. Bd. of Dirs. of Consol. Indep. Sch. Dist. of Wright

• Decision Date: 25 October 1917
• Docket Number: No. 30960.,30960.
• Citation: 184 Iowa 401,164 N.W. 887
• Parties: HAINES v. BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF CONSOL. INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. OF WRIGHT ET AL.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

184 Iowa 401

164 N.W. 887

HAINES

v.BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF CONSOL. INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. OF WRIGHT ET AL.

No. 30960.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Oct. 25, 1917.

Appeal from District Court, Mahaska County; Henry Silwold, Judge.

Certiorari proceedings to test the validity of the organization of a consolidated independent school district. On hearing, the district court annulled and set aside “all proceedings taken or actions had,” and ordered all property returned to the respective districts included. The defendants appeal. Reversed.S. V. Reynolds and Frank T. Nash, both of Oskaloosa, for appellants.

Burrell & Devitt, I. C. Johnson, and L. T. Shangle, all of Oskaloosa, for appellee.

LADD, J.

The defendants are the board of directors of the so-called consolidated independent school district of Wright and the directors individually, and the plaintiff a resident of the district. The petition alleged that said district “has not been organized and established in a manner provided by law, and there is in law and fact no such school district as the consolidated independent school district of Wright, Iowa, for the following reasons”: (1) A petition was not filed with the board of directors of the district within the proposed territory having the largest number of resident voters: (2) such board of directors did not submit the question of organizing the district to the electors; (3) that the proposition petitioned for was never submitted to the voters; (4) the electors did not vote upon the proposition stated in the petition or in the notice of election; (5) the voters passed on a proposition never authorized to be submitted; (6) the judges of election were not sworn or selected, nor did they make returns or canvass the ballots or declare the result as required by law, and (7) ballots were received and counted which were cast between 10 o'clock a. m. and 1 o'clock p. m. of the day of election, and counted contrary to law. The petition was amended by adding as an eighth ground that included in the territory proposed was the village of Wright, and that a separate ballot box was not provided for the electors residing therein. The prayer is that a writ of certiorari issue, and that a transcript of all proceedings be returned by defendants, and “that said proceedings may be annulled, set aside, and held for naught.” Defendants, in their answer as amended, denied that plaintiff had “any legal right to certiorari proceedings,” pleaded a former adjudication, and also to the merits. The contention of plaintiff then is that, owing to the defects in the proceedings as alleged, the...