Springfield Furniture Co. v. School Dist. No. 4

• Decision Date: 02 December 1899
• Citation: 54 S.W. 217
• Parties: SPRINGFIELD FURNITURE CO. v. SCHOOL DIST. NO. 4 OF FAULKNER COUNTY.
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

54 S.W. 217

SPRINGFIELD FURNITURE CO. v. SCHOOL DIST. NO. 4 OF FAULKNER COUNTY.

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

December 2, 1899.

Appeal from Faulkner chancery court; Thomas B. Martin, Chancellor.

Suit by school district No. 4 of Faulkner county against the Springfield Furniture Company for an injunction. From a decree for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed, and complaint dismissed.

On the 30th day of June, 1897, the appellee filed a complaint in the Faulkner chancery court against the appellant and the county treasurer of Faulkner county, alleging that on June 23, 1896, A. K. Pearson, Gus Powers, and W. M. Johnson were directors of plaintiff school district; that on said day the appellant made a pretended contract with said district through two of the directors, A. K. Pearson and Gus Powers, for the sale of school desks, for $156.80, and received two school warrants in payment, signed by Pearson and Powers; that the warrants were registered with the county treasurer in January, 1897; that there was no meeting of the directors of the district at the time the contract was made and warrants issued, but that on a day shortly prior to June 23d there had been a meeting of the directors, at which meeting the proposition to buy desks had been considered, and it had been decided to not buy; that Johnson, one of the directors, did not sign the contract or warrants, and knew nothing of either the contract or warrants until they had been signed; that no meeting of the three directors was held, and no notice of a meeting was given, and, in fact, there was no meeting, but Pearson and Powers acted separately; that the desks were delivered to Pearson and Powers, who paid the freight on them, and took them to the plaintiff's school house; that said desks are in plaintiff's possession, many of them unpacked, and all in perfect condition, and plaintiff here and now offers to return them into court for the Springfield Furniture Company; praying that the treasurer be enjoined from paying the warrants, and that they be declared null and void, and canceled. There was a temporary injunction issued on the day complaint was filed. The Springfield Furniture Company answered, alleging that the purchase was authorized by a regular meeting of the directors of the plaintiff district; that at said meeting a majority of the directors were present, and all had been legally notified of the meeting; that plaintiff accepted said furniture, used the same, and made no offer to return same for more than one year...