Weatherly Independent School Dist. v. Hughes

• Decision Date: 08 July 1931
• Docket Number: No. 3590.,3590.
• Citation: 41 S.W.2d 445
• Parties: WEATHERLY INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. et al. v. HUGHES et al.
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

Page 445

41 S.W.2d 445

WEATHERLY INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. et al. v. HUGHES et al.

No. 3590.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Amarillo.

July 8, 1931.

Appeal from District Court, Hall County; A. J. Fires, Judge.

Suit by Annie Clifton Hughes and husband against the Weatherly Independent School District and others. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendants appeal.

Affirmed.

Williams & Bell, of Childress, and W. A. McIntosh, of Gilmer, for appellants.

Small & Brown, of Wellington, for appellees.

RANDOLPH, J.

This suit was brought by appellees as plaintiffs against appellants as defendants, and the parties will hereinafter be styled as in the trial court. The defendant Weatherly independent school district is sued as a school incorporation, and the other defendants are sued as its trustees.

The plaintiffs' petition seeks an injunction restraining the collection of taxes by said defendants upon 18,237 acres of land belonging to the plaintiffs in Hall county, Tex. The original petition was presented to the judge of the one hundredth district on January 28, 1930, at which time a temporary restraining order was granted. The case was tried on its merits before the court without a jury on September 25, 1930, and the court permanently enjoined the defendants from collecting taxes on said land at a higher valuation than $5 per acre, a total tax of $969.18, which tax had been tendered into court by the plaintiffs.

Up to May 6, 1929, the lands of the plaintiffs were located in Weatherly consolidated common school district No. 19. On that day the county board of trustees of Hall county held a meeting and attempted to incorporate the territory comprising the common school district into the independent district, under the authority conferred by chapter 84, Acts First Called Session, 40th Legislature (1927) see Vernon's Ann. Civ. St. art. 2742b. An election for trustees in the said independent district was held on May 22, 1929, and the result of said election was declared on June 23, 1929. Thereafter the district attempted to function as an independent school district.

The lands of plaintiffs were rendered in Hall county for taxes for the year 1929 in the usual manner. The rendition sheet, when delivered to the tax assessor, did not have the valuation of the lands on it. The assessor himself placed a valuation of $5 per acre on each tract in the district, and this valuation was approved by the commissioners' court as a board of equalization on June 17, 1929, after equalizing the tax renditions for the year 1929, including a tax of $1 on the $100 valuation of all taxable property located in the Weatherly district. In making up the taxes for Hall county, the school tax for the Weatherly district was not carried forward into the roll. The Weatherly district caused a tax assessor to be appointed, and it appears that he rendered the plaintiffs' land for $12 per acre and that the board of equalization appointed by the school board of the Weatherly independent district lowered this rendition to $10 per acre, notwithstanding the fact that the commissioners' court had placed a valuation of $5 per acre on the land for both county and school purposes, levied the tax, and ordered the collector to place the same on the tax rolls for the year 1929 at that value. This order was made on July 2, 1929. When the tax became due and before February 1, 1930, the agent of plaintiffs tendered to J. H. Smith, who was the collector for both the county and the common school district, the amount of taxes due on the county valuation and the rate fixed by the commissioners' court, which was the same rate fixed by the school board. This tender was refused. At this time J. H. Smith had in his possession what he termed a tax roll for the Weatherly independent school district. Smith testified that there was nothing with this tax roll to show that it had ever been approved by the board of trustees of any school district or by any board of equalization; that is, the roll under which he attempted to collect $1,820.50 from the plaintiffs. On February 24th it appears that the tax assessor certified to the roll and the board of equalization approved same and later, on the 11th of April, 1930, the school board approved the roll; this was after taxes had become delinquent and the tender of taxes had been made.

On February 12, 1930, the law under which the defendant district attempted to incorporate was declared unconstitutional. Pyote Ind. School Dist. v. Dyer (Tex. Com. App.) 24 S.W.(2d) 37. The Forty-First Legislature (1929), by H. B. 216, chapter 50, Acts Reg. Session (Vernon's Ann. Civ. St. art. 2742d), attempted to validate all districts created under the Acts of the Fortieth Legislature, but this act did not and could not validate the appellant district, as it was not then in existence.

By S. B. 19, chapter 5, Acts of the 5th Called Session of the 41st Legislature of Texas (1930), page 117 (Vernon's Ann. Civ. St. art. 2742j), the Legislature validated the district here in question, its organization, and acts of its officers, including the...