TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Bender v. Streabich

Henry H. Bender v. Martin K. Streabich, President, Daniel D. Herr, Secretary, John R. Lefever, Treasurer, Robert S. Knox, Henry B. Shuman and Joseph S. Seitz, the Board of School Directors of the School District of Manor Township, Lancaster County

Bender v. Streabich, 37 A. 853 (Pa. 1897)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · State Highest Courts
Decided
July 15, 1897
Docket
Nos. , No. 899
Judges
Fell, Green, McCollum, Sterrett, Williams
Citations
37 A. 853182 Pa. 25140 W.N.C. 4891897 Pa. LEXIS 801
Disposition
Affirmed.
Cited by 11
Syllabus
School laws — Use of school buildings for religious purposes and publie lyceums. School directors have no authority to permit public school buildings to be used for sectarian religious meetings, for the holding of public lyceums, or for any purposes other than school purposes directly relating to the instruction of the pupils of the schools, or for lectures or debates which are made a part of the course of instruction.
Summary
Appeal, No. 899, Jan. T., 1896, by defendant, from decree of C. P. Lancaster Co., Equity Docket, No. 3, page 147, on bill in equity. Bill in equity to prevent the use of public school buildings for religious and lyceum purposes. Before Livingston, P. J. and Brubaker, J., sitting as chancellors. The material averment of the bill was that the said board of school directors, defendants in this bill, for some time past have permitted certain of the schoolhouses of the district to be used for other than common school purposes, against the protest and objection of a large number of taxpayers of said school district, one of whom is your orator, and do still permit the same to be so used, that is to say, the schoolhouse at Little Pittsburgh is used every Sunday by the United Evangelical Association for sectarian religious purposes, the schoolhouse at Spring Yalley is used by the New Mennonite congregation for sectarian religious purposes, and the Walnut Hill and Rural Hall schoolhouses are used for lyceum purposes, all of which are so used with the consent and by the authority given by said board of school directors, defendants in this bill. The court granted a preliminary injunction which it subsequently made perpetual. Srror assigned was decree of the court.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Fell

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Opinion by Mr. Justice Fell,

The bill in this case was filed to restrain the defendants, who are the members of a board of school directors, from permitting the use of the schoolhouses under their charge for sectarian religious meetings, and for the holding of public lyceums. The only question presented is whether school directors may permit or authorize the use of school buildings for other than school purposes. This question, in so far as it relates to their use for’ *253 religious meetings, is fully answered by tbe decision in Hysong v. School District of Grallitzin Borough, 164 Pa. 629 . The use of school buildings by the community at large for public meetings for the discussion of subjects of general interest may be said to be in the line of their use for educational purposes, but it is not the use intended by law. The public school system is for the instruction of pupils who may attend the schools, and not for the instruction or entertainment of other persons. The school directors are trustees of the.school property for that use, and they may not against objection authorize or permit its use for other purposes. If the school buildings may be used for meetings for the convenience, pleasure or instruction of the general public, all other school property may with equal propriety be so used, and it would be but a step further to apply a part of the school funds to the same use. This view of the law does not forbid the use of the buildings for any purpose directly related to the instruction of the pupils of the schools, and it does not exclude their use for lectures or debates which are made a part of the course of instruction.

The decree is affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 11 cases

View all citing references →
1931: 11932: 11936: 11937: 11948: 11949: 11973: 11974: 21979: 219312026peak 1974 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Springfield School District v. Department of Education397 A.2d 1154 (Pa. 1979)
  2. Springfield Sch. Dist. v. DEPT. OF. ED.397 A.2d 1154 (Pa. 1979)
  3. Wiest v. Mt. Lebanon School District320 A.2d 362 (Pa. 1974)
  4. Beard v. Board of Education of North Summit School Dist.16 P.2d 900 (Utah 1932)
  5. Merryman v. School District No. 165 P.2d 267 (Wyo. 1931)
  6. (1974)63 Op. Att'y Gen. 374 (Wis. Att'y Gen. 1974)

Most recent

  1. Springfield Sch. Dist. v. DEPT. OF. ED.397 A.2d 1154 (Pa. 1979)
  2. Springfield School District v. Department of Education397 A.2d 1154 (Pa. 1979)
  3. (1974)63 Op. Att'y Gen. 374 (Wis. Att'y Gen. 1974)
  4. Wiest v. Mt. Lebanon School District320 A.2d 362 (Pa. 1974)
  5. Use of State College Facilities for Religious Activities60 Pa. D. & C.2d 306 (1973)
  6. Regan v. Stoddard65 A.2d 240 (Pa. 1949)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Hysong v. Gallitzin Borough Sch. Dist., 30 A. 482 (Pa. 1894) 32

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list