Lane v. District Township

12 N.W. 478, 58 Iowa 462
CourtSupreme Court of Iowa
DecidedJune 6, 1882
StatusPublished
Cited by25 cases

This text of 12 N.W. 478 (Lane v. District Township) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lane v. District Township, 12 N.W. 478, 58 Iowa 462 (iowa 1882).

Opinion

Beck, J.

1. SCHOOL districts: damages: negligence. I. „ The plaintiff’s petition is in two counts. The first alleges negligence of defendant in permitting the lightroc*s uPon iFe school-house to become bro^eri an<^ 01lt rePair> thereby causing the lightnjng to the building and inflict injury upon plaintiff; the second count charges negligence of defendant in that it failed to provide protection from lightning for the school-house, by reason whereof the building was struck by lightning and the plaintiff was injured. The defendant demurred to both counts of the petition, on the ground that no action for the matters alleged therein can be maintained against it. The judgment of the court in overruling the demurrer presents the only question arising in the case. It is this: Is a school district liable for personal injuries sustained on account of the negligent construction of its school-house, or negligence in failing to keep it in repair?

II. A school district is'a public coiqioration, or quasi cor[463]*463poration, created by statute for the purpose of executing the general laws and policy of the State, which require the education of all its youth. It is a branch of the State government, an instrument for the administration of the laws, 'and is, so far as the people are concerned, an involuntary organization. Code, § 1713. In these réspects it is not different from a county, except that its functions and the purposes of its organization are more restricted, and not so numerous. The education of youth is the only purpose of the corporate school district. Its powers are restricted to the execution of this purpose. The county is a governmental instrument for the collection of taxes, and it provides officers and means for the administration of the law by the courts. It is also charged with the construction and preservation of roads and bridges; with the the support of the poor; with the registry of deeds, and the preparation and preservation of records intended to protect the property and rights of the people. It exists for various other purposes and is clothed with power incident thereto.

This court has held that a county is not liable for a personal injury inflicted by reason of the defective construction of a court-house, and negligence in failing to keep it properly lighted. Kincaid v. Hardin County, 53 Iowa, 430. In that case the plaintiff was in attendance at night upon the court as a witness and received injuries by reason of defective stairs of the court-house, and insufficient light. We held that the law gave him no remedy against the county. We discover no difference as to the liability of the respective corporations, between that case and this, except such as exist from the fact that the school district is far more limited in its functions and powers than the county. These differences of course do not distinguish the cases, but bring this case within the rule of the other.

We regard Kincaid v. Hardin County, as decisive of this case. Following that decision we order the judgment of the District Court to be

Eeversed.

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

Related

Boyer v. Iowa High School Athletic Association
127 N.W.2d 606 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1964)
Farmer v. Poultney School District
30 A.2d 89 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1943)
Shirkey v. Keokuk County
275 N.W. 706 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1937)
Ford v. Independent School District
273 N.W. 870 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1937)
Larsen v. Independent School District
272 N.W. 632 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1937)
Hibbs v. Independent School District
251 N.W. 606 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1933)
Perkins v. Trask
23 P.2d 982 (Montana Supreme Court, 1933)
Niles v. Commissioner
20 B.T.A. 949 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1930)
Bang v. Independent School District No. 27
225 N.W. 449 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1929)
Consolidated School District No. 1 v. Wright
1927 OK 474 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1927)
Krutili v. Board of Education
129 S.E. 486 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1925)
McVey v. City of Houston
273 S.W. 313 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1925)
Brinton v. School Dist. of Shenango Twp.
81 Pa. Super. 450 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1923)
Daniels v. Board of Education
158 N.W. 23 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1916)
Howard v. Tacoma School District No. 10
152 P. 1004 (Washington Supreme Court, 1915)
City of Winona v. Botzet
169 F. 321 (Eighth Circuit, 1909)
City of Denver v. Porter
126 F. 288 (Eighth Circuit, 1903)
Ernst v. City of West Covington
76 S.W. 1089 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1903)
Board of Commissioners v. Reinier
47 N.E. 642 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1897)
Board of Commissioners v. Allman
39 L.R.A. 58 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
12 N.W. 478, 58 Iowa 462, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lane-v-district-township-iowa-1882.