People ex rel. Ring v. Bd. of Educ. of Dist. No. 24
| Decision Date | 26 October 1908 |
| Citation | 86 N.E. 206,236 Ill. 154 |
| Parties | PEOPLE ex rel. RING et al. v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF DISTRICT NO. 24, ETC., SCOTT COUNTY. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Circuit Court, Scott County; R. B. Shirley, Judge.
Petition for mandamus by the people, on the relation of Jeremiah Ring and others, against the board of education of district No. 24 of Scott county, to direct the board to cause the teachers to discontinue the practice of reading passages from the Bible in the schoolroom. From an order sustaining a demurrer to the amended petition of the relators, and adjudging them liable for the costs, they appeal. Dismissed.Thomas F. Ferns, for appellants.
J. A. Warren and J. M. Riggs, for appellee.
This is a petition filed in the circuit court of Scott county by certain parties, who were taxpayers and residents of the school district of which appellee is the board of education, for a peremptory writ of mandamus against said board to direct it to cause the teachers to discontinue the practice of reading passages from the King James version of the Bible in the schoolrooms, from offering up the Lord's Prayer as found in that version, and singing certain hymns. Appellee filed a general and special demurrer to the petition as amended, and on hearing the circuit court entered an order sustaining the demurrer to the second amended petition of the relators, and reciting that ‘the petitioners jointly and severally except to the ruling of the court on said demurrer, and abide by their second amended petition, and decline to plead further, and it is further considered and adjudged by the court that the defendant have and recover of the relators their costs by them in this behalf expended.’ The petitioners thereupon excepted to the rendition of the judgment for costs, and jointly and severally prayed an appeal to this court on the ground that a constitutional question was involved.
Appellee insists that the judgment order sustaining the demurrer was interlocutory, and not final, and was therefore not appealable. Knapp v. Marshall, 26 Ill. 63;Gage v. Rohrbach, 56 Ill. 262;Fleece v. Russell, 13 Ill. 31;Gage v. Eich, 56 Ill. 297;March v. Mayers, 85 Ill. 177;Campbell v. Powers, 139 Ill. 128, 28 N. E. 1062;Livingston County Building Ass. v. Keach, 213 Ill. 59, 72 N. E. 769. Appellants concede that an order sustaining a demurrer is not a final and appealable one, but insist, as this order further recited that the appellants elected to abide by their petition, declined to plead further, and judgment for costs was rendered, that therefore it was a final order. Appellants contend, and we think that the wording of the order sustains the contention, that the judgment order shows that the court sustained the general demurrer. Under our statute, mandamus is an ordinary action at law, and is governed by the same rules of pleading as are applicable to any other actions at law. Dement v. Rokker, 126 Ill. 174, 19 N....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People ex rel. Yarrow v. Lueders
...45 Ill. 224;Dement v. Rokker, 126 Ill. 174, 19 N. E. 33;Board of Supervisors v. People, 159 Ill. 242, 42 N. E. 777;People v. Board of Education, 236 Ill. 154, 86 N. E. 206. The petition takes the place of the alternative writ at common law and is in the nature of a declaration. City of Chic......
-
People ex rel. Pardridge v. Windes
...of Supervisors of Shelby County v. People, 159 Ill. 242, 42 N. E. 777;Dement v. Rokker, 126 Ill. 174, 19 N. E. 33;People v. Board of Education, 236 Ill. 154, 86 N. E. 206. The replication tenders issues of fact as to some matters that are immaterial. The cause has been submitted for a decis......
-
Smith v. Dellitt
...v. Marshall, 26 Ill. 63;Gage v. Rohrbach, 56 Ill. 262;Gage v. Eich, 56 Ill. 297;Hunter v. Hunter, 100 Ill. 519;People v. Board of Education, 236 Ill. 154, 86 N. E. 206. The appeal was therefore premature. An examination of the record fails to show any assignment of error thereon. Village of......
-
People ex rel. McPherson v. Western Life Indem. Co.
...by the same rules of pleading applicable to other actions at law. Dement v. Rokker, 126 Ill. 174, 19 N. E. 33;People v. Board of Education, 236 Ill. 154, 86 N. E. 206. The common-law rule was that the death of a party at any stage of the proceedings abated the action. A distinction, however......