Abernathy County Line Consol. Independent School Dist. v. New Deal Rural High School Dist. No. 3

175 S.W.2d 446
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedOctober 11, 1943
DocketNo. 5570.
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 175 S.W.2d 446 (Abernathy County Line Consol. Independent School Dist. v. New Deal Rural High School Dist. No. 3) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Abernathy County Line Consol. Independent School Dist. v. New Deal Rural High School Dist. No. 3, 175 S.W.2d 446 (Tex. Ct. App. 1943).

Opinion

PITTS, Chief Justice.

This suit was filed by New Deal Rural High School District No. 3 of Lubbock County, appellee, against Abernathy County Line Consolidated Independent School *447 District of Hale County and Lubbock County, attached to Hale County, appellant, seeking to have Sections 35 and 41 in Block C-2, Lubbock County, decreed to be a constituent part of New Deal Rural High School District No. 3, Lubbock County, and to have appellant enjoined from exercising any control for school purposes over said Sections 35 and 41 in Block C-2, Lubbock County, and from interfering with appellee’s management and control for school purposes of said sections.

A trial was had before the court without a jury. Judgment was rendered for appellee and appellant perfected its appeal to this court.

The record discloses that Abernathy County Line Independent School District situated in Hale and Lubbock Counties, attached to Hale County for school purposes, as provided by article 2743, Revised Civil Statutes, was created by Act of the Legislature on March 10, 1917 by House Bill No. 624, chapter 54 Loe. & Sp.Laws. Sections 35 and 41 in Block C-2, Lubbock County were included within the boundaries of and were made a part of said Abernathy District as a result of said act. Subsequently, on March 25, 1918, the Legislature passed House Bill No. 175, Chapter 27, Loe. & Sp.Laws, which became a law ninety days after adjournment, purporting to transfer said Sections 35 and 41, Block C-2, Lubbock County, out of the said Abernathy District and to place them within and make them a part of Center Common School District No. 2 of Lubbock County, which Center District was subsequently, on April 30, 1935, grouped with other Lubbock County districts into New Deal Rural High School District No. 3, Lubbock County, appellee. The record further discloses that in 1936 to 1939 certain other school districts were grouped with Abernathy County Line Independent School District, making it Abernathy County Line Consolidated Independent School District, appellant.

Appellant in its first assignment of error attacks the constitutionality of House Bill No. 175, Chapter 27 of the Local and Special Laws of the Fourth Called Session of the Thirty-fifth Legislature of 1918, purporting to transfer Sections 35 and 41, Block C-2, Lubbock County, from the Abernathy District to the Center District and charges that the title of said act fails to comply with Article 3, Section 35 of the State Constitution, Vernon’s Ann.St., in that the title of said act does not disclose any legislative intent or purpose to affect any school districts except common school districts and county line common school districts of Lubbock County and therefore does not give notice of any intention to affect the Abernathy County Line Independent School District of Hale County and that the same is void in so far as it attempts to affect the two sections in question.

The title of House Bill No. 175, Chapter 27, is as follows:

“Readjusting Certain Common School Districts in Lubbock County.

“H. B. No. 175.

Chapter 27.

“An Act re-adjusting the Common School Districts and County Line Common School Districts in Lubbock County, Texas, against which outstanding bond issues are now in force, changing boundary lines of said Districts, dividing districts and describing them by metes and bounds, providing that any lands that may by this Act be incorporated in a given Common School District from any other Common School District or County Line Common School District, or any common school district that is by this Act divided, shall continue to be subject to taxation for the payment of the principal, annual interest, and sinking fund of any common school district or County Line common school district school house bonds that may have heretofore been issued by the common school district or county line common school district from which such lands are transferred and remaining unpaid; and declaring an emergency.”

In reading House Bill No. 175, Chapter 27, we find no reference is made to any district in Hale County, to any independent district, to any independent county line district nor to the Abernathy District in either the title or the body of the act. The only way a person could determine that Abernathy County Line Independent School District had been affected by said bill would be by following the callings of the boundaries in the body of the act and tracing them on a map to find that Sections 35 and 41 of Block C-2, Lubbock County, had been changed from the Abernathy District in Hale County to the Center District in Lubbock County.

*448 Article 3, Section 35 of the State Constitution, provides in part as follows: “* * * But if any subject shall be embraced in an act, which shall not be expressed in the title, such act shall be void ■only as to so much thereof, as shall not be so expressed.”

In Sutherland, County Judge et al. v. Board of Trustees of Bishop Independent School Dist. et al., Tex.Civ.App., 261 S.W. 489, 490, writ refused, in a discussion of the purpose of a title to an act, the court lays down the following rule: “* * * The true test to be applied in cases of this character is: Does the title fairly give notice by its recitals, to all persons concerned, of the subject-matter of the act? If by its title it appears to affect only the residents of particularly designated localities, while the provisions in the body of the bill affect other localities ■or territory, then the title is misleading and unconstitutional, in so far as it affects the unnamed places.”

The above rule is supported by a long list of authorities, to which we add Landrum et al. v. Centennial Rural High School Dist. No. 2 et al., Tex.Civ.App., 134 S.W.2d 353; 39 Tex.Jur. 77, par. 36, and pages 100 to 102, par. 147.

It is our opinion that the title to House Bill No. 175, Chapter 27, considered only together with the body of the bill as it was originally passed by the Legislature of date March 25, 1918, is invalid .and void in so far as it attempts to affect Sections 35 and 41, Block C — 2, Lubbock County, because it does not give ■sufficient notice of the purpose and intent of the act as required by Section 35, Article 3 of the State Constitution. Appellant’s first assignment of error is therefore sustained when considered alone as presented but we must look further into the additional proceedings as reflected by the record.

1 Appellant then complains that the trial ■court erred in holding that House Bill No. 175, Chapter 27, was validated by subsequent acts of the Legislature which resulted in transferring Sections 35 and 41, Block C-2 from the Abernathy District to the Center District. With this complaint we cannot agree for the reasons set out below.

The trial court concluded as a matter ■of law in his findings of fact and conclusions of law “that any defect which might have existed in said act (meaning House Bill No. 175, Chapter 27) as passed was cured by each and all of the following general laws of the State of Texas:

“(a) S.B.384, c. 298, p. 666, General Laws, Regular Session, Forty-first Legislature, effective ninety days after March 14, 1929, the date of adjournment, and now article 2802a, Vernon’s Ann.Statutes.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Opinion No.
Texas Attorney General Reports, 1977
State v. Sandlin
390 S.W.2d 62 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1965)
City of San Antonio v. Stauffer
331 S.W.2d 443 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1959)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
175 S.W.2d 446, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/abernathy-county-line-consol-independent-school-dist-v-new-deal-rural-texapp-1943.