School Dist. No. 14, Fremont County v. School Dist. No. 21, Fremont County, 1913

Decision Date01 October 1935
Docket Number1913
Citation48 Wyo. 511,49 P.2d 682
PartiesSCHOOL DIST. NO. 14, FREMONT COUNTY v. SCHOOL DIST. NO. 21, FREMONT COUNTY
CourtWyoming Supreme Court

ON RESERVED CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS from the District Court Fremont County; LIN I. NOBLE, Judge.

Action by School District No. 14, Fremont County, against School District No. 21, Fremont County.

Case remanded.

For the plaintiff, the cause was submitted upon the brief of F. B Sheldon, Jr., of Riverton.

Section 99-309, W. R. S., provides for the establishment of new school districts and Section 99-901 provides for the apportionment of indebtedness or credits when a school district is divided. This section was construed in School District No. 3 v. School District No. 2, 29 Wyoming 80 and the rule there announced was followed in the case of School District No. 7 vs. School District No. 1, 33 Wyo. 65. The plaintiff contends that the equitable distribution is determined by Section 99-901, W. R. S., above referred to, and the basis of apportionment is the assessed valuations of the respective districts after division as compared to the total assessed valuation of the property in the original district. This contention is denied by defendant, claiming that the indebtedness should be apportioned in accordance with Section 29-601, W. R. S relating to new counties formed out of territory taken or detached from another county, which provides the rule of equitable proportion. We feel that defendant's contention is without merit and that Section 99-901 relates to credits or indebtedness, while Section 29-601 is restricted to indebtedness alone. Plaintiff further contends that the word "credits" as used in Sec. 99-901 is synonymous with "assets" in accordance with the rule announced in Pelican v. School Directors, (Wisc.) 51 N.W. 871. The above case is also reported in 52 N.W. 1049, where a dissenting opinion appears. As to the second reserved question, plaintiff contends that all of the original district should be apportioned between the several districts newly created, in the proportion which the ratio of the assessed valuation of the property in the several districts bear to the whole assessed valuation of the original district. Not only does this seem to be the purpose of Section 99-901, W. R. S., but it is a logical and equitable rule when applied to school district divisions. We contend that the school laws should be construed and determined as a whole, and that Section 99-309 and Section 99-901 are identical in purpose. School District No. 3 v. School District No. 2, supra. In that case, the old district paid the expenses of the schools in the new district until their close the summer following, but refused to pay thereafter. The new district maintained that the old district should continue to pay the school expenses of the new district, until the new district received from the County Treasurer, the school moneys allotted to it and the taxes voted by it. The court also held that statutory provisions as to procedure for an apportionment do not prevent the districts concerned from making an apportionment by agreement between themselves. 56 C. J. 273, Sec. 116.

For the defendant there was a brief and the cause was argued orally by A. H. Maxwell, of Lander.

Our law governing apportionments when school districts are divided was enacted in 1921 and appears as Section 99-901, W. R. S. Section 24, Article 3 of the State Constitution states the requirements as to titles in legislative acts. It will be noted that no mention of an apportionment of assets appears in the title to the act referred to. There can be no apportionment without an express provision therefor. 25 R. C. L. 866. The fact that the statute uses the term "credits" has evidently confused the plaintiff. To apportion indebtedness, credits must be taken into consideration, and there are express provisions in Sec. 29-603 with respect thereto. Our law does not provide for an apportionment of assets when there is no indebtedness. If the first question should be answered in the affirmative, upon what basis should such apportionment be made? Board of Commissioners v. Board of Commissioners, 1 Wyo. 137, 92 U.S. 307. The third and fourth questions are moot ones as they ask for a construction of Sec. 99-309, and plaintiff does not ask for anything under the provisions of this section. The fifth question is also a moot one. That is evident from the fact that an answer either way would not have any bearing on the issues in this case. The indebtedness that may be apportioned must be such as has been authorized by district meetings. Sec. 99-323, R. S. School District v. Western Tube Company, 5 Wyo. 185. While Sections 99-901-2 do not expressly provide for an apportionment of assets of the original district, yet the plan results in a division of assets. Com'rs. of Laramie County v. Com'rs. of Albany County, 92 U.S. 307. What is drawn from the old district by the new district is its proportion of the public school funds for payment of teachers and other necessary expenses. Sec. 99-309, W. R. S. A new district cannot receive funds based on the number of school children in the district until there has been a census. In this particular case that would have been a year after the date of the organization of the plaintiff district. The same situation exists as to teachers and bus drivers. Sec. 78-405. A new district does not have pupils, teachers and bus drivers until it has been in existence a year or the greater part of a year. The legislative scheme for raising money clearly conflicts with the creation of funds by the old district, and the apportionment of an equitable amount thereto to the new district, until the new district is able to take care of itself.

RINER, Justice. KIMBALL, Ch. J., and BLUME, J., concur.

OPINION

RINER, Justice.

In this case certan questions have been reserved and certified to this court by the district court of Fremont County, it being stated in the order doing so that they are "important and difficult constitutional questions." The procedure contemplated is that provided by Sections 89-5001 to 89-5003 inclusive, Wyoming Revised Statutes 1931.

Briefly, the action is one by School District No 14 i...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Willis v. Willis
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • October 1, 1935
    ... ... from the District Court, Sweetwater County, V. J. TIDBALL, ... Action ... by ... ...
  • Cuthbertson v. Union Pacific Coal Co.
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • November 24, 1936
    ... ... County; V. J. TIDBALL, Judge ... Proceeding ... State v ... High School, (Wyo.) 5 P.2d 255; Company v ... Industrial ... (Wyo.) 49 Wyo. 251, 54 P.2d 897; School Dist. No. 14 v ... School Dist. No. 21, 48 Wyo. 511, ... ...
  • MacDougall v. Board of Land Com'rs. of State
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • October 1, 1935
    ... ... from the District Court, Laramie County; V. J. TIDBALL, ... Action ... by ... Land Office, (Okla.) 110 P. 766; School ... District v. State, (Ark.) 213 S.W. 961; ... ...
  • Riverton Valley Drainage Dist. v. Board of County Com'rs. of Fremont County
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • December 23, 1937
    ... ... commission or fee to tax collectors. 56 C. J. 716; County ... School v. Gantt, 37 Md. 521. In this connection, it ... should be borne in mind that a large part of the ... the county for collecting city taxes. Sec. 115-1005, Rev. St ... 1931. That was in 1913. The drainage act in question was ... passed in 1923. Hence it would seem that, in making no ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT