Hinze v. Winston County Board of Education

103 So. 2d 353, 233 Miss. 867, 1958 Miss. LEXIS 450
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
DecidedJune 9, 1958
DocketNo. 40836
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 103 So. 2d 353 (Hinze v. Winston County Board of Education) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hinze v. Winston County Board of Education, 103 So. 2d 353, 233 Miss. 867, 1958 Miss. LEXIS 450 (Mich. 1958).

Opinion

Gillespie, J.

The Board of Education of Winston County, Mississippi, which is also the Board of Trustees of the Winston [869]*869County School District, and the County Superintendent of Education, appellees here, filed snit in the Chancery Court of Winston County against the Board of Trustees of the Louisville Municipal Separate School District, situated in Winston County, and the superintendent of said municipal school district, appellants here, seeking to enjoin the latter from accepting, enrolling and permitting to attend the Louisville Municipal Separate District Schools certain named children, about 75 in number, who reside in the Winston County School District, such school children having been assigned to attend schools in the Winston County School District, and without their release from the Winston County School District by the Board of Education of Winston County.

The essential facts determinative of the issues were admitted in appellants’ answer and the lower court decided the issue on the pleadings and entered a decree for the injunction. While it is contended by appellants that the answer raises issues of fact, the issues raised are legal rather than factual.

Acting under authority of the Laws of 1953, Ex. Session, Chapter 12, the Board of Education of Winston County reorganized and reconstituted the school districts in Winston County, exclusive of the territory included within the municipal corporate limits of the City of Louisville, into one county-wide school district unit designated as the Winston County School District Unit. Under the same authority, the Louisville Municipal Separate reorganized and reconstituted all of the territory within the municipal corporate limits of the City of Louisville into one separate municipal school district unit designated as the Louisville Municipal Separate School District Unit. All of these proceedings were approved by the State Education Finance Commission and became effective on July 1, 1957.

Prior to the beginning of the 1957-1958 school term, each school district unit designated attendance centers [870]*870■within their respective districts and appellees assigned the students living within the Winston County School District Unit to the several attendance centers in said school district, except that a large number of students living within the Winston County School District Unit were assigned and transferred to the Louisville Municipal Separate School District Unit under a contract between the two school districts as provided by law, and the school children so transferred under this contract are not the students involved in this lawsuit.

At the beginning of the 1957-1958 school term, approximately 75 students who reside within the Winston County School District Unit presented themselves to schools outside the school district of their residence and in the Louisville Municipal Separate School District Unit without the permission or approval of the Winston County Board of Education. These students were accepted and enrolled by appellants and permitted to attend schools in the Louisville Municipal Separate School District unit over the objection and protests of appellees.

The students whom appellees charged were illegally attending school in the Louisville Municipal Separate School District Unit pay their own transportation to and from school and pay a tuition fee to the latter named school district.

We are of the opinion that the only question raised by this appeal having sufficient merit to justify discussion is whether students who live in one school district organized under the Laws of 1953, Ex. Session, Chapter 12, may attend school in another school district without the consent and approval of the board of trustees of the district wherein such students reside.

The Board of Education of Winston County School District Unit is also the Board of Trustees of that school district and has all the authority, duties and powers conferred by any of the statutes of this State upon boards of trustees of school districts. Laws of 1953, Ex. Ses[871]*871sion, Chapter 12, Section 7(c) (Section 6328-07(c), Code of 1942).

Laws of 1953, Ex. Session, Chapter 17, Section 11 (Section 6328-31, Code of 1942), provides as follows:

“The hoard of trustees shall organize a school so as to avoid unnecessary duplication and shall determine what grades shall he taught at each school and shall have the power to specify attendance areas and to designate the school each pupil shall attend.”

The statute providing for transfer of students from one district to another is Laws of 1953, Ex. Session, Chapter 14, Section 7, as amended by Chapter 25, Laws Ex. Session 1954, (Section 6248-07, Code of 1942), which provides as follows:

“Transfer students.' — (a). Upon the petition in writing of a parent or guardian, resident of the school district of an individual student filed or lodged with the president or secretary of the board of trustees of a school district in which the pupil has been enrolled or is qualified to be enrolled as a student, or (b) upon the aforesaid petition or the initiative of the board of trustees of a school district as to the transfer of a grade or grades, individual students living in one school district or a grade or grades of a school within the district may be legally transferred to another school district, by the mutual consent of the boards of trustees of all school districts concerned, said consent to be given in writing and spread upon the minutes of such boards, and with the approval in writing of the county board or boards of education concerned.
“The board of trustees of the school district to which such petition may be addressed shall act thereon not later than its next regular meeting subsequent to the filing or lodging of said petition, and failure to act within said time shall constitute a rejection of such request. The board of trustees of the other district involved, the transferee board, shall act on such request for transfer [872]*872as soon as possible after the transferor board shall have approved or rejected such transfer and no later than the next regular meeting of the transferee board, and a failure of such transferee board to act within such time shall constitute a rejection of such request. If such a transfer should be refused by the board of trustees of either school district, then an appeal may be had to the county board of education. The said county board of education to which said appeal is taken shall act thereon not later than the date of its next regular meeting subsequent to the disapproval or failure to act by the board of trustees of said school district, or not later than the date of its next regular meeting subsequent to the filing of such appeal. In cases involving more than one county, appeals shall lie to the State Educational Finance Commission unless the boards of education of all counties concerned shall approve such transfer.
“Legally transferred students going from one school district to another shall be counted for teacher allotment and allotments for other current costs by the school district wherein the pupils attend school, but shall be counted for transportation allotment purposes in the school district which furnishes or provides the transportation.

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

Related

Fails v. Jefferson Davis County Public School Board
96 So. 3d 1 (Court of Appeals of Mississippi, 2011)
Tally v. Scott County
282 So. 2d 217 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1973)
County Board of Education v. Smith
121 So. 2d 139 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1960)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
103 So. 2d 353, 233 Miss. 867, 1958 Miss. LEXIS 450, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hinze-v-winston-county-board-of-education-miss-1958.