Walker Reorganized School Dist. R-4 v. Flint

• Decision Date: 06 May 1957
• Docket Number: R,I,R-4,No. 22594,No. 1,1,22594
• Parties: WALKER REORGANIZED SCHOOL DISTRICTespondent, v. Chester FLINT and Vernon County Board of Education, Appellants, and Vernon County Reorganized Districtntervenor-Appellant.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

Page 200

303 S.W.2d 200

WALKER REORGANIZED SCHOOL DISTRICT R-4, Respondent, v. Chester FLINT and Vernon County Board of Education Appellants, and Vernon County Reorganized District No. 1, Intervenor-Appellant.

No. 22594.

Kansas City Court of Appeals, Missouri.

May 6, 1957.

W. Don Kennedy, Nevada, for appellants.

Everett E. Teel, Nevada, for respondent.

HUNTER, Justice.

On June 20, 1956, plaintiff, Walker Reorganized School District R-4, filed its petition praying for a judgment declaring that Coal Creek Common School District No. 37 had become a part of plaintiff district by annexation, and that the funds and property of that former common school district are now the property of plaintiff, who is entitled to assume control thereof, and to receive the taxes paid by its residents. The defendants named were Chester Flint, clerk and member of the Board of Directors of the Coal Creek District, and the Vernon County Board of Education.

On July 20, 1956, these defendants filed their answer requesting the court to declare that the purported annexation of the Coal Creek Common School District to plaintiff was void, and that this district since June 28, 1956, had become a part of Vernon County Reorganized District No. 1 which was entitled to all of its property, books and money.

On August 10, 1956, Vernon County Reorganized District No. 1, hereinafter referred to as intervenor, filed its motion praying for the court to permit it to intervene in the cause, and also filed its answer to plaintiff's petition and its intervening petition praying the court to declare the purported annexation elections for the Coal Creek Common School District No. 37 to plaintiff void, and to further declare that this Common School District had been annexed by intervenor which was entitled to all of its property, books and money.

On August 30, 1956, the case came on for trial. The court first considered the pending motion for leave to intervene. What actually occurred then must be gathered from the transcript 'The Court: In the case of Walker Reorganized School District R-4 vs. Chester Flint and Vernon County Board of Education, Case No. 212995, is the plaintiff ready to proceed?

'Mr. Teel: Yes, Your Honor.

'The Court: Are the defendants ready to proceed?

'Mr. Kennedy: Yes, Your Honor. Your Honor, I filed a motion to intervene on behalf of the Reorganize R-1 District which you have before you there. As I understand it. Mr. Teel has no opposition to that.

'Mr. Teel: No.

'The Court: Motion of Vernon County Reorganized District No. 1 to intervene is sustained; by consent of counsel.

'Mr. Teel: You might let the record show our answer filed.

'The Court: This is by consent is it, gentlemen?

'Mr. Teel: Yes.

'Mr. Kennedy: I am representing both the intervenor and the defendants. On behalf of the original defendants my answer will be an admission of all of the allegations in the intervening petition.

'The Court: The intervenor's petition?

'Mr. Kennedy: Yes.

'The Court: What about the other petition? Frankly, I don't like to try lawsuits when no pleadings are filed. I want to know what the pleadings are.

'Mr. Teel: I didn't have anything to plead to, Your Honor.

'The Court: I don't mind telling you gentlemen that the last time I was over here I got the pleadings, took them home and briefed the case up from the court's standpoint anyhow. Now an intervening petition comes in here and I don't want some answer filed later on which the court hadn't considered while I was here.

'Mr. Teel: I might say this for the court's benefit and for my benefit--of course there was nothing for me to plead to until just how because the intervening petition hadn't been passed on and accepted.

'The Court: Just a moment. You have had me make a written entry here now that the motion to intervene is sustained by consent.

'Mr. Teel: For the information of the court----

'The Court: 'I have written Defendants file answer to intervening petition. Plaintiff files answer to intervening petition.'

'Mr. Teel: My answer will be an admission of paragraph 2, subparagraphs 1 and 2.

'The Court: What about paragraph 3?

'Mr. Teel: That will be denied.

'The Court: Let's proceed then and I will make up the record later. I know what is in paragraph 3.

'Mr. Kennedy: We have entered into a stipulation which will eliminate a good deal of proof. I will hand you a copy of it in just a moment but I want to dictate it into the record here.'

The admitted sub-paragraphs 1 and 2 of paragraph 2 (of intervenor's petition) are:

'1. For its intervening petition, intervenor says that on April 17, 1956, the Vernon County Board of Education adopted a plan for a reorganized District to include, among other common and town school districts, Vernon County Common School District No. 37; that said plan was presented to the State Board of Education and by it rejected; and that subsequently and on June 11, 1956, said Vernon County Board of Education adopted said plan (excluding Blue Mound and Harwood districts, which had been included in the plan adopted April 17, 1956, and rejected by the State Board of Education) as its own, and called an election to be held in the proposed reorganized district on June 28, 1956.

'2. At said election, said plan was approved by a majority of the voters voting at said election; the results were duly certified to the secretary of the Vernon County Board of Education, who in turn certified the results to the State Board of Education; a board of directors of such reorganized district was duly elected; and said reorganized district has acted in all respects as a district.'

Counsel then orally stipulated as follows: On April 16, 1956, there existed in Vernon County, Missouri, a common school district known as Coal Creek District No. 37. Walker Reorganized School District R-4 (plaintiff herein) also was then in existence. On April 18, 1956, there were posted notices that there would be a special election held in the common school district on May 3, 1956, to vote on the proposition whether such district should be annexed to plaintiff. This election was held on May 3, 1956, and resulted in twenty votes favoring annexation with eight votes against annexation. On April 20, 1956, with directors Ray Eddy and Chester Flint present an election was ordered by the School Board of the Coal Creek District for May 10, 1956, to vote on the same proposition, and notices thereof were duly posted. At the May 10th, election there were 22 votes favoring annexation and 10 votes opposing annexation. The results of both elections were duly certified to the Board of Directors of Walker Reorganized School District R-4, which accepted such Coal Creek School District.

On April 17, 1956, the Vernon County Board of Education approved a reorganization plan which included the Coal Creek District in a reorganized district to be known as Reorganized School District R-1. Such plan was subsequently submitted to the voters of the proposed reorganized district R-1 on June 28, 1956. It was adopted by them by a majority of 361 to 58. The results of this election were duly certified to the Secretary of the Vernon County Board of Education, who, in turn, certified the results to the State Board of Education.

At that point plaintiff's counsel asked the court to enter a judgment for plaintiff on the pleading and the stipulated facts for the reason that the facts as stipulated admit that an election was held and the results thereof, and there can be no attack on that election and the results thereof other than by another remedy, quo warranto brought in the State's name, that they are not pursuing here. Intervenor's counsel tacitly conceded that as to defendants, Flint and the Vernon County Board of Education, a quo warranto proceedings brought by them in the name of the State was the appropriate remedy, but contended that as to the dispute between plaintiff and Intervenor, both of whom claim the Coal Creek School District, a declaratory judgment action is proper.

Defendant then called as witnesses, Chester Flint and E. Ray Eddy. Flint testified that he was a member of the Board of Directors of the Coal Creek School District. A special board meeting for the purpose of annexation was called for the night of April 20, with all members notified. He and Ray Eddy, President of the Board, were present. They called a special election to be held on May 10, to vote on the proposition of the annexation of the Coal Creek School District No. 37 to plaintiff. No petition requesting the Board to take that action was presented to the two of them that evening; nor did they have such a petition with them at that meeting. In fact, he had never seen such a petition. He was asked:

'Q. Why was the election called? A. A petition had been presented to Ray Eddy.

'Q. Do you know what date that was presented? A. No, I don't just right now.

'Q. Prior to April 17th wasn't it? A. I don't believe so.

'Q. You are not sure? A. I'm not positive.

'Q. You as a member of that board that night were acting on a petition which hadn't been presented to the board as a whole, is that correct? A. That's right.

'Q. Did Mr. Clevenger or Mr. Smith out in your district come to your house on the 16th of April with a petition? A. Yes.

'Q. You just testified that you didn't----

'Mr. Teel: Would you read his testimony, Mr. Reporter? (whereupon the previous testimony of the witness was read by the reporter.)

'Q. Was Mr. Clevenger or Mr. Smith there with that petition on April 16th, or were they not? A. They were there. They showed it to my dad.

'Q. You didn't see it? A. I didn't see nothing but a white sheet of paper--I don't know whether there was a word on it or not.

* * *

* * *

'Q. You still felt that this sheet of paper which you say you just saw and didn't have in your hands--you felt strong enough about it at this board meeting you voted to have a special election under that scrap of paper, didn't you, Mr. Flint? A. Yes, but the duties of the school...