[DOWNLOAD] "Byer v. Rural High School Dist. No. 4" by Supreme Court of Kansas # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Byer v. Rural High School Dist. No. 4
- Author : Supreme Court of Kansas
- Release Date : January 10, 1950
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 62 KB
Description
The opinion of the court was delivered by This was an action to enjoin the issuance of school district bonds. Plaintiff appeals from an adverse judgment. In his petition plaintiff alleged that he was a resident and taxpayer within the limits of the defendant Rural High-school District; that the district was organized in 1917 and the individual defendants were members of its school board; that the defendants threatened and were about to issue general obligation bonds of the district in the sum of $70,000, as the result of an election and to sell and dispose thereof, thereby creating an indebtedness of the district, and thereafter to levy a tax against the property of the plaintiff, burdening him with an unlawful tax; that the defendants claim authority to issue bonds by virtue of the Laws of Kansas of 1949, chapter 389 (Senate bill 228); that defendants caused notice of a bond election to be given, which notice, for present purposes may be said to have called an election on a fixed day upon the question of issuing general obligation bonds of the district in an amount not exceeding $70,000 ""for the purpose of providing funds to pay the cost of enlarging, remodeling and improving the high-school building, located at Reserve, Kan., in said school district""; that such notice was insufficient and invalid in that it did not clearly inform the electors that the purported school building was to be moved from its present location to a new site some three or four blocks distant; that the notices and the ballots used were insufficient in that they did not clearly inform the electors what purported high-school building was to be remodeled and improved and the location of said building, in that many electors were under the impression and led to believe by the insufficiency of the notices and ballots that the building to be enlarged, remodeled and improved was the school building used for conducting the classes of the rural high school which in fact was a building owned by Common School District No. 72 of Brown county and not the building contemplated to be enlarged, remodeled and improved by the rural high-school district. Plaintiff further alleged that the rural high-school district was not the owner of a schoolhouse in the district and for that reason was not entitled to call an election or issue bonds under the statute above mentioned; that the rural high-school district was the owner of lots 1 and 2, in block 9, in Reserve, but under its deed it had no fee simple title and the building on the lots had never been and was not being used as a schoolhouse, and that the district,