Texas Co. v. Panhandle Independent School Dist., 4227.
| Decision Date | 14 May 1934 |
| Docket Number | No. 4227.,4227. |
| Citation | 72 S.W.2d 957 |
| Parties | TEXAS CO. et al. v. PANHANDLE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. et al. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Carson County; E. J. Pickens, Judge.
Injunction suit by the Texas Company and others against the Panhandle Independent School District and others. From a judgment denying injunctive relief, plaintiffs appeal.
Affirmed.
J. R. Porter, of Clarendon, for appellants.
H. H. Smith, of Panhandle, and Hoover, Hoover & Cussen, of Canadian, for appellees.
The plaintiffs, the Texas Company and eight other corporations, applied to the district court of Carson county for an injunction to restrain the Panhandle independent school district and its officers from collecting or attempting to collect from plaintiffs on their respective properties in said school district any tax for the year 1932 in excess of 35 cents on the $100 valuation, and to secure a mandatory order directing the defendants to transfer to the proper account the different funds on hand belonging to the district.
A hearing was had before the court on the merits of plaintiffs' application, and, from a judgment denying them relief, this appeal is prosecuted.
The appellants contend that the levy of 85 cents on the $100 valuation for the year 1932, 60 cents thereof for the general fund and 25 cents for the sinking fund, produced more revenue than was needed or necessary to pay the principal due and accrued interest on the bonded indebtedness and to pay the current expenses for maintaining the school, and was therefore excessive, illegal, and void,
It is admitted that the Panhandle independent school district had been legally organized and duly authorized to levy a tax not exceeding 100 cents on the $100 valuation on the property in the district for school purposes. It is also conceded that the levy was regular, made in good faith, and that appellees were not guilty of actual fraud.
The record discloses that the district in 1908 issued "Panhandle Independent School District School House Bonds of the denomination of $1,000.00 each," dated May 1, 1908, and payable annually, with the option "of redeeming the same at any time after twenty years" from their date.
On April 10, 1930, the district exercised its option, paid off said bonds, and had them canceled, with the sinking fund that had been accumulated for that purpose and an additional $10,000 drawn from the general fund. The payment of these bonds according to the option was a legitimate transaction of which appellants cannot complain.
In 1922 the district issued "Panhandle Independent School District School House Bonds, series 1922 * * * of the denomination of $1,000.00 each, aggregating $40,000.00," bearing interest at the rate of 6 per cent. per annum, payable annually. These bonds were payable $10,000 February 1, 1932, 1942, 1952, and 1962, respectively. The interest on these bonds was paid as it matured, and the bonds due February 1, 1932, were paid, leaving a balance of said issue of $30,000.
On September 2, 1932, at the date on which the levy complained of was made, there was legally credited to the sinking fund of the 1922 series $17,290.11. No tax was levied in 1932 for the interest or sinking fund of the 1922 series, and therefore no injury resulted to appellants by reason of the legitimate amount in said sinking fund.
The district in 1927 issued "Panhandle Independent School District School House Bonds, Series 1927," numbered consecutively from 1 to 175, inclusive, dated December 1, 1927, "of the denomination of $1,000.00 each," bearing interest at the rate of 4¾ per cent. per annum, payable semiannually. The principal is payable $4,000 annually to and including December 1, 1952, and $5,000 annually thereafter until the entire issue is discharged. They were issued, according to the order and the recitation in the face of the bonds, "for the purpose of constructing and equipping a public free school building within said district of brick and stone material and constructing permanent repairs of brick and stone material to the public free school buildings of said district." In said order there was levied "a tax of 22¢ on each $100.00 valuation of taxable property in said district for the year 1928 and the same shall be assessed and collected and applied to the purposes named; and for each of the years 1929 to 1966 inclusive, there is hereby levied and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Superior Oil Co. v. Sinton Independent School Dist.
...the amount of the levy, which is within the reasonable authority and discretion of the taxing authorities. Texas Co. v. Panhandle Independent School Dist., Tex.Civ.App., 72 S.W.2d 957, wr. ref. We copy from this latter opinion a quote from 3 Cooley Taxation (4th Ed.) 2088, § 1031, as 'The r......
-
Harberson v. Arledge, 16991
...the amount of the levy, which is within the authority and discretion of the levying officers." Texas Co. v. Panhandle Independent School Dist., 72 S.W.2d 957 (Tex.Civ.App., 1934, writ ref.); Madeley v. Trustees of Conroe Independent School Dist., 130 S.W.2d 929 (Tex.Civ.App., 1939, dism., j......
-
Gilbert v. El Paso Hosp. Dist.
...deficit, this rate may be lower than, higher than, or equal to the previous year's rate. See Texas Co. v. Panhandle Indep. Sch. Dist., 72 S.W.2d 957, 959 (Tex. Civ. App.--Amarillo 1934, writ ref'd) (holding overall tax levy, within statutory limits, to be a discretionary matter for the taxi......
-
Kyle v. Stone, 9353
...and the City's charter, we find no abuse of discretion in maintaining that surplus. Texas Co. v. Panhandle Indep. School Dist., 72 S.W.2d 957 (Tex.Civ.App.--Amarillo 1934, writ ref'd). In view of the City's status as a home rule city under the Home Rule Enabling Act, Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann. a......