Stinson v. Graham

Decision Date28 May 1926
Docket Number(No. 209.)<SMALL><SUP>*</SUP></SMALL>
Citation286 S.W. 264
PartiesSTINSON et al. v. GRAHAM et al.
CourtTexas Court of Appeals

Appeal from District Court, Taylor County; W. R. Ely, Judge.

Suit by W. A. Graham and others, Trustees of Common School District No. 22, against James P. Stinson and others, members of the County Board of School Trustees of Taylor County. Judgment granting an injunction, and defendants appeal. Reversed, and injunction dissolved.

Stinson, Coombes & Brooks, of Abilene, for appellants.

Cox & Hayden, of Abilene, for appellees.

PANNILL, C. J.

Pursuant to the Act of the 39th Legislature, c. 59, p. 204 (Vernon's Annotated Texas Statutes 1925, arts. 2922a to 2922l, inclusive), the county board of school trustees of Taylor county, grouped common school districts Nos. 18, 19, and 22 for the formation of a rural high school district. Later a petition praying that its action be rescinded was presented to said board, and after an extended hearing, denied. This suit was then brought by the trustees of said common school district No. 22 to restrain the county board from carrying said order into effect. No appeal was prosecuted to the state superintendent. The petition alleged invalidity in the order assailed for numerous reasons, but only two, which assert that the act of the Legislature referred to is unconstitutional, can be considered.

The trial judge granted a temporary writ of injunction, which upon final hearing was made permanent, on the ground that the legislative act in question was repugnant to the "due process" clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the federal Constitution. As to the other matters alleged, the trial court correctly held that the petition for review did not lie until after appeal to the state superintendent of public instruction. Jennings v. Carson (Tex. Com. App.) 220 S. W. 1090; Bevers et al. v. Winfrey et al. (Tex. Civ. App.) 260 S. W. 627; South San Antonio Ind. School Dist. v. Martine (Tex. Civ. App.) 275 S. W. 265.

Appeals to the state superintendent from orders of the county board creating, changing, and modifying school districts having been provided for, equity will not interfere until legal remedies are exhausted. So, the sole question presented is: Does the law challenged offend either the Constitution of Texas or of the United States? If it does, the judgment is correct, if not, the temporary injunction was improvidently granted, and perpetuated in error.

That said chapter 59, Acts of 39th Legislature, is in accord with the Constitution of Texas was affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals for the Fifth District in a clear and concise opinion by Judge Looney. McPhail v. Tax Collector, 280 S. W. 260. This decision was approved by Supreme Court, by the refusal of a writ of error.

But appellees assert, with great vigor, that the law is repugnant to the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and that this case is ruled by the decision in Browning v. Hooper, 46 S. Ct. 141, 70 L. Ed. 330, commonly known as the Archer County Case. When it is considered that the order under review is simply one creating a high school district by grouping three common school districts, where no election to provide for the issuance of bonds has been called and no special tax has been levied, it is difficult to perceive any analogy between this case and the Archer County Case. It is only where special tax levied to provide a local improvement is challenged that the "due process" clause becomes applicable. To invoke the applicability of the Archer County Case, it would be necessary to presume that an election would be ordered, resulting favorably to an issuance of bonds. Such prophetic power is not conferred on a Court of Civil Appeals.

It would certainly not be contended that a road district created by the commissioners' court, with power to use the labor of those liable to work the road and to expend the funds raised by general taxation, would be obnoxious to said Fourteenth Amendment because of failure to provide for notice to and hearing of each individual taxpayer. It is not believed that the question of "due process" arises from consideration of the order of the board of trustees creating the objectionable rural high school district.

This determination should dispose of the case, as courts do not sit for the purpose of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
21 cases
  • General Insurance Co., of America v. Ham, State Insurance Commissioner
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • May 5, 1936
    ...declatory judgments unless they will serve a useful purpose. Bank v. Bank, 19 A. L. R. 1101; Holt v. County, (Mont.) 243 P. 811; Stinson v. Graham, 286 S.W. 264; Kariher's Petition, 284 Pa. 445. 131 A. 265; Revis v. Daugherty, (Ky.) 287 S.W. 28; Burton v. Realty & Insurance Company, (N. C.)......
  • Washington-Detroit Theater Co. v. Moore
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • March 6, 1930
    ...case requires that all the interested parties shall be before the court. Holt v. Custer County, 75 Mont. 328, 243 P. 811;Stinson v. Graham (Tex. Civ. App.) 286 S. W. 264;West v. Wichita, 118 Kan. 265, 234 P. 978;Revis v. Daugherty, 215 Ky. 823, 287 S. W. 28;Patterson v. Patterson, 144 Va. 1......
  • McLeod v. McLeod
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • December 1, 1961
    ...case requires that all the interested parties shall be before the court. Holt v. Custer County, 75 Mont. 328, 243 P. 811; Stinson v. Graham (Tex.Civ.App.), 286 S.W. 264; West v. [City of] Wichita, 118 Kan. 265, 234 P. 978; Revis v. Daugherty, 215 Ky. 823, 287 S.W. 28; Patterson[s' Ex'rs] v.......
  • Cook v. Neill
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • December 13, 1961
    ...to determine appeals from orders of county school trustees, creating, changing, and modifying school districts. See Stinson v. Graham, Tex.Civ.App. (1926), 286 S.W. 264, 265; District Trustees of Tennessee Colony Common School Dist. No. 21 v. Central Education Agency, Tex.Civ.App. (1953), 2......
  • 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