Com. ex rel. Fye v. Burnside Township School District

8 Pa. D. & C. 498, 1926 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 187
CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Centre County
DecidedAugust 21, 1926
DocketNo. 102
StatusPublished

This text of 8 Pa. D. & C. 498 (Com. ex rel. Fye v. Burnside Township School District) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Centre County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Com. ex rel. Fye v. Burnside Township School District, 8 Pa. D. & C. 498, 1926 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 187 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1926).

Opinion

Keller, P. J.,

This case comes before the court upon the petition of one H. H. Fye, a resident and taxpayer of Burnside Township, Centre County, Pennsylvania, praying for a writ of mandamus upon the president, secretary and other members of the school board of the school district of said township, commanding them, their agent, teacher and employees, to admit Archie Fye and Merrell Fye to the school located at Germania, in said school district, to receive their education there, as required by the laws of Pennsylvania, or show cause why they should not do so, which said petition was presented to the court and filed Nov. 17, 1925, and upon which date an alternative writ of mandamus was awarded by Hon. Arthur C. Dale, then judge of this court. An answer was filed by the respondent denying that the said Archie Fye and Merrell Fye had a legal residence for school purposes in Burnside Township, and praying that said writ be dismissed at the costs of the -relator. Later, testimony was taken before the court, which has been filed in the record.

[499]*499The determination of this proceeding depends upon the construction of the School Code (Act of May 18, 1911, P. L. 309), and especially of sections 1401 and 1402 (as amended by the Acts of May 20, 1921, P. L. 1032, and of April 30, 1925, P. L. 378).

These sections are as follows:

“Section 1401. Every child, being a resident of any school district in this Commonwealth, between the ages of six and twenty-one years, may attend the public schools in his district, subject to the provisions of this act.”
“Section 1402. A child shall be considered a resident of the school district in which his parents or the guardian of his person resides. If any child has no parents or guardian of his person, then such child shall be considered a resident of the district in which the person sustaining parental relations to such child resides.”

Section 1402, supra, has been amended by the Acts of May 20, 1921, P. L. 1032, and of April 30, 1925, P. L. 378, so that said section 1402, as amended, so far as it applies to the present case, now reads as follows: “A child shall be considered a resident of the school district in which his parents or the guardian of his person resides. When a resident of any school district keeps in his home a child of school age, not his' own, supporting the child gratis as if it were his own, such child shall be entitled to all free school privileges accorded to resident school children of the district, including the right to attend the public high school maintained in such district or in other districts, in the same manner as though such child were in fact a resident school child of the district, and shall be subject to all the requirements placed upon resident school children of the district: Provided, that before accepting such child as a pupil, the board of school directors of the district may require such resident to file with the secretary of the board a sworn statement that he is a resident of the district, that he is supporting the child gratis, that he will assume all personal obligations for the child relative to school requirements, and that he intends to so keep and support the child continuously and not merely through the school term. . . .” The words underscored, relating to the right to attend the public high school of the district, were added by the amending Act of April 30, 1925, P. L. 378; the remaining part of the section quoted is the language of the amending Act of May 20, 1921, P. L. 1032.

Prom the testimony adduced at the hearing and the pleadings, the court makes the following

Findings of fact.

1. H. H. Fye, the relator, grandfather of Archie Fye and Merrell Fye, is a resident and taxpayer of Burnside Township, Centre County, Pennsylvania, having lived there all his life, and resides within the limits of the Germania School, Burnside Township School District.

2. Edward Fye and Lulu Fye, his wife, are both living and are the parents of Archie Fye and Merrell Fye; at the time these proceedings were begun, and for several years prior thereto, they were residents of Snow Shoe Township, Centre County, Pennsylvania, but thereafter moved to Madeira, Clear-field County; they are able to care for and maintain their children.

3. Both Archie Fye and Merrell Fye were enrolled as pupils of Moshannon School of the Snow Shoe Township School District for the school year of 1923-1924. Archie attended said school until Nov. 23, 1923; Merrell attended said school until the school term ended May 15, 1924.

4. Archie Fye, now ten years of age, came to the home of his grandfather, the relator, in the fall of 1923, on or about Sept. 1, 1923, according to the [500]*500evidence, and has since continuously resided and made his home with the relator until the present, with the exception of week-end visits paid his parents at intervals of from two to five weeks, he going to see them Saturday and returning Sunday.

5. Merrell Fye, now thirteen years of age, came to the home of his grandfather, the relator, about Sept. 1, 1924, and has since continuously resided and made his home with the relator until the present, with the exception of week-end visits paid his parents at intervals of from two to five weeks, he going to see them Saturday and returning Sunday.

6. From the respective dates above mentioned upon which said Archie Fye and Merrell Fye came to his home, the relator has maintained and supported them gratis, as if they were his own children; he has furnished them with board, clothing and everything necessary for their support and maintenance, with the exception of the gift of a pair of shoes to Archie by his parents.

7. Since Archie and Merrell Fye have made their home with the relator, their parents have not exercised any parental control or authority over them, nor have they had any custody of them except during the above mentioned week-end visits paid to them at various intervals; and said parents seem to be entirely satisfied that these boys shall continue to reside in the home of the relator and be supported and maintained by him, and be under his control and authority, without any objection on their part.

8. After Nov. 23, 1923, Archie Fye attended the Germania School in Burnside Township School District during the remainder of the school year of 1923-1924 without objection.

9. Both Archie and Merrell Fye attended the Germania School in Burnside Township School District during the school year of 1924-1925 without objection.

10. Both Archie and Merrell Fye attend the Germania School in Burnside Township School District during the school year of 1925-1926 until about Oct. 5, 1925, at which time, by direction of the Burnside Township School Board, they were refused admission as non-residents of the school district, for the reason, as stated, that their parents resided in Snow Shoe Township and paid no taxes in Burnside Township. Since said last mentioned date these boys have not attended school in Burnside Township nor anywhere else.

11. Germania School in Burnside Township School District contains twenty double seats, thus having a seating capacity for forty pupils. There were twenty-four pupils enrolled, exclusive of Archie and Merrell Fye, during the school year of 1925-1926, about half of whom were of foreign parentage.

Discussion.

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

Related

Ford v. Kendall Bor. Sch. District
15 A. 812 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1888)
Black v. Graham
86 A. 266 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1913)
Gettysburg School District v. Cumberland Township School District
50 Pa. Super. 87 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1912)
School District of Borough v. School District
77 Pa. Super. 75 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1921)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
8 Pa. D. & C. 498, 1926 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/com-ex-rel-fye-v-burnside-township-school-district-pactcomplcentre-1926.