TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

School District No. 3 v. Bodenhamer

Sch. Dist. No. 3 v. Bodenhamer, 43 Ark. 140 (1884)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of Arkansas · State Highest Courts
Decided
May 15, 1884
Judges
Smith
Citations
43 Ark. 140
Headnotes
1. School Districts ; May sue and be sued. By section 53 of the common schools Act of December 7,1875, each school district is constituted a body corporate with power to sue and be sued in any of the courts of this State having competent • jurisdiction. 2. Mandamus : Against School Directors Mandamus to compel a public corporation to pay a debt can be employed only after judgment establishing the amount of the debt. •
Summary
APPEAL from Baxter Circuit Court. Hon. R. IT. Powell Circuit Judge. This was a simple money contract for services rendered as teacher. If the directors made any such contract they exceded theirpo wers and authority, and the appellant'as a quasi public corporation is not bound. Story on Agency, Sec. 172; Perry on Trusts, Vol. 2, Sec. 475, 511. The directors may be personally liable, but not the district. 2 Ark, 338; 38 lb., 454. See School Act 1875 Secs. 61, 62, 67, Ac. Mandamus was the proper remedy, after demand and refusal. Gantt’s Dig., Sec. 4150; 6 Ark., 9; 26 Ark., 257. The Justice of the Peace had exclusive jurisdiction. Const. Art. VII, Sec. 40, Clause 1. Each school district is a body corporate and may sue and be sued as such. Sec. 53, p. 71 School Act,- Dec. 7,1875, and the action of the directors bind the District, lb. Sec. 62. 2. Mandamus not the remedy until after judgment. Wells Jurisdiction of Courts, Sec. 472 and notes ; 26 Ohio St. 365; 34 Mich., 201; 20 Hans., 404.

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

Opinion of the Court — Smith

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

Smith, J. This action was begun before a Justice of the Peace to recover a balance of $75 due for teacher’s wages, pursuant to the terms of a written contract entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant’s directors. The plaintiff hac1*judgment and the School District appealed to the Circuit Court. There, after a motion to dismiss and a demurrer for want of jurisdiction, the defendant declined to contest the matter further in that forum, and allowed judgment to go, and has appealed to us.

By Section 53 of the Common Schools Act of December 7, 1875, each School District is constituted a body corporate, with power to'sue and be sued in any of the courts of the state having competent jurisdiction. And the cause of action was within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Justice of the Peace. J There is no force in the suggestion that the plaintiff’s remedy was mandamus to compel the directors to issue an order upon the County Treasurer for her wages. The writ of mandamus is frequently employed to compel public corporations to perform their duties towards their creditors. But there must first be a judgment to establish the validity and amount of the debt.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1929: 11930: 11976: 11994: 12015: 119292026peak 1929 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Town of Lead Hill v. Ozark Mountain Regional Public Water Authority2015 Ark. 360, 472 S.W.3d 118
  2. Huie v. Barkman18 S.W.2d 334 (Ark. 1929)
  3. Rastle v. Marion County Rural School District No. 1543 S.W.2d 923 (Ark. 1976)
  4. Shackleford v. Thomas32 S.W.2d 810 (Ark. 1930)
  5. Redd v. Sossamon868 S.W.2d 466 (Ark. 1994)

Most recent

  1. Town of Lead Hill v. Ozark Mountain Regional Public Water Authority2015 Ark. 360, 472 S.W.3d 118
  2. Redd v. Sossamon868 S.W.2d 466 (Ark. 1994)
  3. Rastle v. Marion County Rural School District No. 1543 S.W.2d 923 (Ark. 1976)
  4. Shackleford v. Thomas32 S.W.2d 810 (Ark. 1930)
  5. Huie v. Barkman18 S.W.2d 334 (Ark. 1929)

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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