Otwell v. West

• Decision Date: 09 June 1964
• Docket Number: No. 22484,22484
• Citation: Otwell v. West, 137 S.E.2d 291, 220 Ga. 95 (Ga. 1964)
• Parties: Michael OTWELL, by next friend, v. Paul WEST et al.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

Page 291

137 S.E.2d 291

220 Ga. 95

Michael OTWELL, by next friend, v.Paul WEST et al.

No. 22484.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

June 9, 1964.

Syllabus by the Court

One can not invoke the aid of equity where no effort is made to exhaust administrative remedies or an adequate remedy at law is available.

Michael Otwell, by next friend John Otwell, brought his petition seeking equitable relief in the Fulton Superior Court against Dr. Paul West, Superintendent of Fulton County Public Schools, Dr. E. S. Cook, Assistant Superintendent of Atlanta Public Schools, Dr. John Letson, Super-intendent of Atlanta Public Schools, Mrs. Joe Williamson, Principal of Utoy Springs Elementary School, Ed Baker, and W. L Robinson, Mrs. P. D. Christian, Jr., Perry J. Hudson, L. Marvin Rivers and Elwyn Gaissert as members of the Fulton County Board of Education and Oby T. Brewer, Jr., Dr. R. E. Clemmons, Fred Shell, T. Charles Allen, Elmo Holt, Glenn Frick, Mrs. G. Ray Mitchell and Harold F. Jackson as members of the Atlanta Board of Education, and Marcus Cash.

The pertinent facts as alleged in the petition are: that the plaintiff, an eight year old minor, resides on the outskirts of the City of Atlanta, the houses across the street from him being in Fulton County; that he lives closer to a Fulton County School, Utoy Springs, than to the nearest City of Atlanta School, Ben Hill; that he entered Utoy Springs with the permission and acquiescence of the defendants; that a school bus picks up students residing across the street from the plaintiff and carries them to Utoy Springs; that the plaintiff rode such bus for about two weeks until certain named defendants stopped him from riding the bus; that he was permitted to ride the bus, upon payment of a fee of ten cents each way, for about two more weeks and again stopped from riding the bus on the grounds he was not eligible to ride such bus; that there are other students who reside in Atlanta and attend Utoy Springs who ride the bus; that the plaintiff's father, by letter attached as an exhibit to the petition, asked for a hearing regarding the plaintiff's riding the bus and that the defendant Superintendent of the Fulton Schools answered stating they felt it would be best 'for your boy and for us to ask you to transfer your son' to Ben Hill; that the Fulton Superintendent told the plaintiffhe could ride the bus if the City of Atlanta would make a written request, which the city refused to do; that, by virtue of the letter, the defendants are threatening to transfer the plaintiff; that there are 17 students of Utoy Springs who reside in Atlanta and the plaintiff's father'believes'the decision of the defendants to transfer the plaintiff was made to prevent him from pursuing any administrative remedy or remedies he might have in an effort to secure an order requiring the defendants to permit the plaintiff to ride the school bus.

The petition alleged the defendants' actions deprived the plaintiff of due process of law under Section I of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution in that: the defendants permit some students who reside in Atlanta to ride the school bus to Utoy Springs but refuse to permit the plaintiff to do so; the defendants permit some students who reside in Atlanta to attend Utoy Springs, in the best interest of the student, but are attempting to transfer the plaintiff after reaching the decision that it was to his best interest to attend Utoy Springs; that the defendants conspired and collaborated to transfer the plaintiff to deprive him of an appeal; that the defendants have singled out the plaintiff who is one of a class composed of students attending Utoy Springs, residing in the City of Atlanta and in an area serviced by a school bus transporting students to Utoy Springs and deny the plaintiff the right of riding the bus but grant the right to other students similarly situated.

The petition further alleged that unless the defendants are restrained and enjoined from transferring the plaintiff from Utoy Springs to Ben Hill the question will become moot on November 25, 1963, and that after that date the plaintiff will have no right to appeal to the State Board for an adjudication of his rights.

The prayers are: that the defendants be temporarily restrained and temporarily and permanently enjoined from transferring the plaintiff from Utoy Springs to Ben Hill; that the defendants be temporarily and...