School Dist. No. 17 v. School Dist. No. 2
| Decision Date | 04 February 1885 |
| Parties | SCHOOL DISTRICTS NO. 17 AND 24, KEARNEY COUNTY, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. SCHOOL DISTRICTS NO. 2 AND 18, OF KEARNEY COUNTY, DEFENDANTS IN ERROR |
| Court | Nebraska Supreme Court |
ERROR to the district court for Kearney county. Tried below before GASLIN, J.
AFFIRMED.
Sam. L Savidge, for plaintiffs in error.
Calkins & Pratt and Joel Hull, for defendants in error.
In 1872 school district No. 2 of Kearney county was formed so that it comprised a large portion of that county. As thus organized the district issued its bonds in the sum of $ 3,000, with which a school-house was erected therein. At the annual school meeting in said district in 1877 a tax of fifteen mills on each dollar valuation was voted for the purpose of paying the debts of said district. In regard to this tax we find the following stipulation in the record: "It is hereby stipulated as a matter of fact, that the proceeds of the fifteen mills tax of 1877 received by the defendant district No. 2 was by said district used in paying bonds and indebtedness incurred before the 14th day of February, 1878 and that after applying the same as aforesaid there still remained fifteen hundred dollars bonded indebtedness incurred in 1873."
In February, 1878, school districts Nos. 17, 18, and 24 were duly organized out of the territory of No. 2, the value of the school-house at that time being about $ 1,000. The county superintendent made no division of the property belonging to the old district, nor determined what amount it should pay to the new districts, and this action is brought to recover the amounts justly due. The court below found the issues in favor of the defendant and dismissed the action.
In School District No. 9 v. School District No. 6, 9 Neb. 331, 2 N.W. 712, and 13 Id., 166, where a school district which possessed no property of any kind was divided before the school tax was levied, and afterwards the tax was levied on the property of the new district as well as the old, that tax was collected and paid to the old district without authority of law so far as the amount collected on the property of the new district was concerned, and it was held that the amount thus wrongfully obtained could be recovered back. And we adhere to those decisions. Where, however, a school district possesses property at the time a new district is formed out of its territory, it is the duty of the county superintendent to "ascertain and determine the amount justly due to such new district from any district or districts out of which it may have been in whole or in part formed," etc. Gen. St., 962. [*] This language is without limitation or restriction, and applies to all cases where the district has property. The superintendent is made the tribunal to determine the whole matter as justice may require. In this determination he may consider taxes then levied and to be collected from the district as it existed before the change was made, and so apportion the relative amounts, that justice may be done between the districts. He is invested with exclusive authority in the premises and must apportion the amount due...
To continue reading
Request your trial