People ex rel. Groff v. Bd. of Educ. of Crossville Cmty. High Sch. Dist. No. 120, 27144.
| Court | Supreme Court of Illinois |
| Writing for the Court | WILSON |
| Citation | 48 N.E.2d 954,383 Ill. 166 |
| Parties | PEOPLE ex rel. GROFF et al. v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF CROSSVILLE COMMUNITY HIGH SCHOOL DIST. NO. 120. |
| Docket Number | No. 27144.,27144. |
| Decision Date | 20 May 1943 |
383 Ill. 166
48 N.E.2d 954
PEOPLE ex rel. GROFF et al.
v.
BOARD OF EDUCATION OF CROSSVILLE COMMUNITY HIGH SCHOOL DIST. NO. 120.
No. 27144.
Supreme Court of Illinois.
May 20, 1943.
Proceeding by the People on the relation of F. H. Groff and others against the Board of Education of Crossville Community High School District No. 120, to determine to which school district certain territory belongs. Judgment for defendant, and relators appeal.
Cause transferred to the Appellate Court for the Fourth District.
[48 N.E.2d 955]
Appeal from Circuit Court, White County; Blaine Huffman, judge.
Albert McCallister and Kern Pearce & Pearce, all of Carmi, and Hefner & Harris, of Evansville, Ind., for appellants.
Ulys Pyle and Cyril C. Endicott, both of Carmi, for appellees.
WILSON, Justice.
The sole question requiring consideration upon this appeal is whether a franchise is involved, within the contemplation of section 75 of the Civil Practice Act. Ill.Rev.Stat.1941, chap. 110, par. 199. From the pleadings and a stipulation of facts it appears that the Crossville Community High School District No. 120, in White county, is a legally organized school district. Plaintiffs are the five directors of Granville Community High School District No. 182, located in White, Edwards and Wabash counties, the major portion of the district being in White county. October 29, 1941, a petition was filed in the office of the county superintendent of schools of White county, pursuant to section 89a of the act to establish and maintain a system of free schools (Ill.Rev.Stat.1941, chap. 122, par. 97) requesting the superintendent to order an election for the purpose of voting for or against the proposition to establish a community high school within certain described territory, including territory then a part of the non-high school district of White county. In accordance with section 89c of the School Law, the petition was submitted to the Superintendent of Public Instruction of the State, who, on November 5, 1941, acted favorably upon it. An election was held November 29, 1941, beginning at 1 o'clock P.M. A majority of the votes cast was in favor of the organization of the Grayville Community High School District No. 182. Subsequently, plaintiffs were elected directors of the district. In the meantime, on October 31, 1941, petitions for the annexation to the Crossville district of the territory previously mentioned, namely, a part of the non-high school district of White county, were filed with the county superintendent of schools. November 29, 1941, at 9:35 o'clock A. M., the county superintendent filed in the office of the county clerk a map of the territory described in the petitions, as required by section 96a of the School Law.
September 19, 1942, plaintiffs filed their amended complaint in the circuit court of White county against the defendant, the board of education of the Crossville district, charging that it was exercising or purporting to exercise its legal powers, authority and functions over the territory in controversy without lawful authority; that the petition filed in the office of the county superintendent of schools on October 31, 1941, was void for the reason that on October 29, 1941, a petition was filed in the same office for the organization of a high school district which was duly and legally organized and is now the Grayville Community High School District No. 182, and that the petition and district last mentioned include the territory in question. By its answer, defendant averred that it was exercising its legal powers over the territory by virtue of its annexation by petition in the manner
[48 N.E.2d 956]
prescribed by section 96a of the School Law; that, prior to the time of the filing of a map showing the new boundaries of the defendant district, the territory in controversy was a part of the non-high school...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Spaulding School Dist. No. 58 v. Waukegan City School Dist. No. 61, 35326
...Unit School District No. 176 v. County Board of School Trustees, 6 Ill.2d 323, 129 N.E.2d 158; People ex rel. Groff v. Board of Education, 383 Ill. 166, 48 N.E.2d 954. A proceeding of the latter type involves, rather, as the majority opinion in this case conclusively reflects, only question......
-
People ex rel. Simpson v. Funkhouser, 27638.
...void. The issue is not, as in the recent case of People ex rel. Groff v. Board of Education of Community High School District No. 120, 383 Ill. 166, 48 N.E.2d 954, whether the strip of territory in question belongs to a newly and validly organized school district or, instead, to an already ......
-
Taylor v. Krupp, 34703
...(Community Unit School Dist. v. County Board of School Trustees, 6 Ill.2d 320, 128 N.E.2d 898; People ex rel. Groff v. Board of Education, 383 Ill. 166, 48 N.E.2d 954), however, it is appellants' contention that there is involved the elective franchise, or right to vote, of the electors res......
-
Marnik v. Northwestern Packing Co., 30392.
...by the government, which does not apply to citizens generally by common right. [79 N.E.2d 57]People ex rel. Groff v. Board of Education, 383 Ill. 166, 48 N.E.2d 954. In Chicago City Ry. Co. v. People ex rel. Story, 73 Ill. 541, this court observed: ‘A franchise, according to the definition ......