Lollich v. Hot Springs Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 10

• Decision Date: 13 December 1924
• Docket Number: No. 5758.,5758.
• Citation: 47 S.D. 624,201 N.W. 354
• Parties: LOLLICH v. HOT SPRINGS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. NO. 10 et al.
• Court: South Dakota Supreme Court

47 S.D. 624

201 N.W. 354

LOLLICH

v.HOT SPRINGS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. NO. 10 et al.

No. 5758.

Supreme Court of South Dakota.

Dec. 13, 1924.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Fall River County; James McNenny, Judge.

Suit by C. T. C. Lollich, for himself and for all other taxpayers of Hot Springs Independent School District No. 10, against the Hot Springs Independent School District No. 10, of Hot Springs, Fall River County, and others. From an order overruling their demurrer, defendants appeal. Reversed.E. W. Martin and E. B. Adams, both of Hot Springs, for appellants.

Bertin Goddard, of Hot Springs, for respondent.

POLLEY, J.

On the 26th day of February, 1924, the board of education of Hot Springs independent school district No. 10, pursuant to a resolution theretofore duly adopted, held an election to determine the proposition of issuing and selling bonds of said school district in the sum of $86,800, for the purpose of building a high school building in said district. At such election the affirmative of said proposition carried by a large majority. The board thereupon proceeded to issue and offer said bonds for sale, when the plaintiff herein, a resident taxpayer of said school district, brought this action, for the purpose of enjoining the issue and sale of said bonds.

The ground upon which said injunction is asked is that the indebtedness of $86,800, to be created by the issuance of said bonds together with an existing indebtedness of $48,500, will exceed the constitutional limit of indebtedness of 5 per cent. of the assessed value of the assessable property in said school district. Section 4, art. 13, S. D. Const. The school district demurred to plaintiff's complaint. The trial court overruledsaid demurrer, and defendants, school district, board of education, and the president and secretary of said board appeal.

From the allegations in the complaint, the truth of which is admitted by the demurrer, it appears that the assessed value of the property in the district is $1,736,408. Five per. cent. of this amount equals $86,820.40. The existing indebtedness of the district is $48,500, which with the amount of the proposed bond issue is $135,300. But the district has cash assets in its treasury of $40,197.08, and taxes levied and in process of collection amounting to $40,000. These two items amount to $80,197.08, and defendants contend they are entitled to have this amount deducted from $135,300, in order to determine the true indebtedness...