State v. Bowman
| Decision Date | 09 May 1927 |
| Docket Number | No. 15953.,15953. |
| Citation | 294 S.W. 107 |
| Parties | STATE ex rel. HULTZ et al. v. BOWMAN et al., Board of Education. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Carroll County; Ralph Hughes, Judge.
Mandamus proceeding by the State, at the relation of A. C. Hultz and others, to compel Hugh Bowman and others, as members of the Board of Education of Consolidated School District No. 1 of Carroll County, to maintain a high school in said district. Alternative writ was made permanent, and defendants appeal. Reversed and remanded, with directions.
Guy Whiteman, of Norborne, and S. 3. & G. C. Jones, of Carrollton, for appellants.
Scott J. Miller, of Chillicothe, and Franken & Timmons, of Carrollton, for respondents.
This case comes here on appeal from a judgment of the circuit court of Carroll county. An alternative writ of mandamus was issued. The purpose of the petition for the writ was to compel the appellants herein, as members of the hoard of education of consolidated school district No. 1 of Carroll county, to maintain a high school in said district. The alternative writ was, after a hearing, made permanent. By appropriate action the case is brought here.
The petition, to which relators made return, alleged, in substance, that a high school was established in said district in 1921 and maintained until 1926; that in 1921 the board of education of the consolidated school district rented a building and made improvements therein; that a library and laboratory equipment were located in said building; in the year 1921 four grade school teachers were employed and a teacher for the high school: that each of the said schools were maintained for a period of nine months during the year; that the valuation for the years 1926-27 was ample to rent a building for a high school in the district; that for the year 1926 there was more money available for the school district than ever before; that the directors arbitrarily refused to have a high school and arbitrarily employed grade school teachers at larger salaries than formerly without reason; that arbitrarily and without reason or excuse the board spent $700 in improving the grade schools; that the said acts were not in the exercise of a lawful discretion, but were done solely with the design to destroy said high school in said district.
The relators made return and said that the district did not own a building adequate for a high school and the funds were not sufficient to maintain a high school during said year; that they had made bona fide efforts to rent a suitable building.
The prayer of the petition is:
"Wherefore, relators pray this honorable court to issue its alternative writ of mandamus herein, returnable in such time as shall be directed by the court, compelling the respondents herein, as members of the board of education of consolidated school district No. 1 of Carroll county, Mo., to maintain a high school in said school district for the school year of 1926-27, as required by law, and compelling respondents to maintain the equipment now in said high school building and the building used in connection therewith in their present condition, and not destroy the same or dispose of any part thereof pending the hearing of this proceeding, that said respondents be compelled to maintain said high school in said district in the same building that has been, used for that purpose since the organization of the district and to employ a teacher for said high school; and relators further pray that, upon the final hearing hereof, said writ of mandamus be made permanent, and for such other and further relief as to the court seems meet and proper in the premises."
A reply in the nature of a general denial was filed, and thus on the issues joined the case Was tried.
Upon the trial It was admitted as follows:
After there admissions there was oral testimony covering a wide range, and, in substance, showed that, when the consolidated school district was organized in 1921, four common school districts were taken in; That one Joseph Dorner owned a building which is less than one-quarter of a mile from the center or the district. This building was rented by the board of education and was rearranged by building partitions, putting blackboards on the walls, moving the library of about 125 books, and putting in equipment for a laboratory, and was thus used for a high school until the school year of 1926-27. The building was a story and a half, with a basement under part of it. The building had two rooms. The west room was 34v30, and the east room 9x16. The vest room was used for ordinary school work and the east room had in it the laboratory equipment. A stove was placed in each room In 1925 Mr. Caulk, a teacher, papered the room.
The rent paid Mr. Dorner in 1921 and 1922 was $200. In 1922 and 1924, $225; in 1925, $120—the rent being reduced because Mr. Dornor had a boy ready for high school.
The board erected a shed or barn to shelter the animals ridden to school by the children. A coal shed and other necessary buildings were erected. The school was inspected by the officers of the state superintendent of schools and found to be doing good work in the high school, which was properly equipped; that students would be given proper credits for the work which they did. This, of course, was before 1926.
The building rented for a high school was used as a sort of community center. Some small defects were more apparent in the building in 1926 than had appeared before that time. The testimony as to the defects had a wide range, and, as common in all cases involving matters of great moment in small communities, the interest of the witnesses was manifest in their testimony.
A carpenter and contractor was sworn and stated that in his opinion $25 would repair the defects that he found. All except one of the members of the board, in substance, testified that they had no building or did not have enough money or both. Only one director, it seems, was in favor of maintaining the high school.
Mr. Dorner offered to rent the building to the board before this suit was brought, but the board did not accept his offer. The board told Mr. Dorner that they would not longer rent the building and the board took away all of their school equipment. The evidence disclosed that the year 1925 the four teachers of the common school were paid $75 a month for nine months, the high school teacher, $140; that no teachers were attempted to be hired at the same salary. Two teachers with no previous experience were hired at $85, another at $95, and another at $85; they never tried to hire any high school teacher for the year 1926.
The evidence showed that $927.35 was received by the district from railroad taxes, and the sum of $317 remained in the treasury from the year 1925. This money would go by law only to the teachers' fund. Section 11223, R. S. 1919.
The appellants introduced evidence tending to prove that the building of Mr. Dorner's was in bad repair; that the house was erected in 1868 or 1869; that Mr. Dorner wanted $200 a year from June to June, the district to keep up repairs, and, if the building was "blown up" or destroyed, the board would have to replace it; that the plastering was off and was upon the floor.
The graduating class of 1925 were present and testified that the room was very comfortable; that there was no leak in the roof; that the floors did not sag; that there were no cracks in the floor except very small ones; that there was one board out of the porch floor, but an old board had been nailed over it; that the snow did not blow into the building.
On substantially this testimony Hon. Ralph Hughes, judge of the circuit court of Carroll county made the alternative writ permanent.
In discussing the nature of a mandamus proceeding, the Supreme Court of the state said, in the case of State ex rel. Hyde v. Jackson County Medical Soc., 295 Mo. 160, 243 S. W. loc. cit. 345, as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Kansas City v. State Highway Commission
... ... abuse of its discretion. 44a, Art. IV, Mo. Constitution. (6) ... Mandamus will lie to compel the performance of a duty where ... there is an official discretion, if there has been a palpable ... abuse of discretion. 38 C. J., p. 598, sec. 74; State ex ... rel. Hultz v. Bowman, 294 S.W. 107; State ex rel ... Dolman v. Dickey, 280 Mo. 536, 219 S.W. 363; State ... ex rel. Attorney General v. Humphreys, 338 Mo. 1091, 93 ... S.W.2d 924; State ex rel. McCleary v. Adcock, 206 ... Mo. 550, 105 S.W. 270. (a) In view of the heavy expense ... incident to a ... ...
-
State ex rel. Kopper Kettle Restaurants, Inc. v. City of St. Robert
...ex rel. Reis v. Nangle, Mo.App., 349 S.W.2d 508, 512(4); Mangieracina, supra, 141 S.W.2d at 92(7); State ex rel. Hultz v. Bowman, Mo.App., 294 S.W. 107, 109(3); State ex rel. Hendricks v. Newton, Mo.App., 206 S.W. 392, 393; State ex rel. Wagener v. Cook, Mo.App., 187 S.W. 1122, 1123(2); Jou......
-
State ex rel. Schneider v. Bourke
...v. Adcock, 105 S.W. 270; State ex rel. McAnally v. Goodier, 93 S.W. 928; State ex rel. Roberts v. Wilson, 297 S.W. 419; State ex rel. Hultz v. Bowman, 294 S.W. 107. Relator, the respondent here, showed a clear legal right to the relief prayed for. State ex rel. Spriggs v. Robinson, 161 S.W.......
- State ex rel. St. Louis County v. State Highway Com'n