McCullough v. Board of Education

51 Cal. 418, 1876 Cal. LEXIS 67
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1876
DocketNo. 4818
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 51 Cal. 418 (McCullough v. Board of Education) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
McCullough v. Board of Education, 51 Cal. 418, 1876 Cal. LEXIS 67 (Cal. 1876).

Opinion

By the Court:

The Board of Education had no authority to appropriate Hamilton Square, or any portion thereof, as a site for the proposed high school. The purposes for which the public squares may be used are those defined by positive law, and the erection of school-houses thereon is not one of these purposes. The resolution of the Board of Supervisors assuming to authorize the Board of Education to appropriate [420]*420a portion of this square for that purpose, though passed in due form, was inoperative, because the Board had no authority to devote a public square to that purpose.

The contract of the Board of Education, upon which the suit is founded, was consequently %Htra vires in the extreme sense, and the plaintiff could derive no rights thereunder, since he was bound to take notice that the Board of Education could not, under any circumstances, acquire a right to occupy a public square for school purposes,

Order granting a new trial affirmed.

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

Related

Reid v. City of Bessemer
130 So. 2d 592 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1962)
Palmerton Borough v. Palmerton Area School District
25 Pa. D. & C.2d 525 (Carbon County Court of Common Pleas, 1961)
City of Marysville v. Boyd
181 Cal. App. 2d 755 (California Court of Appeal, 1960)
BOARD OF M. & A. OF YAZOO CITY v. Wilson
99 So. 2d 674 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1958)
Board of Mayor v. Wilson
99 So. 2d 674 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1958)
Roberts v. City of Palos Verdes Estates
209 P.2d 7 (California Court of Appeal, 1949)
Headley v. City of Northfield
35 N.W.2d 606 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1949)
Loehler v. United States
90 Ct. Cl. 158 (Court of Claims, 1940)
Baird v. Board, C., South Orange
154 A. 204 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1931)
Minnesota Power & Light Co. v. State
225 N.W. 164 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1929)
Kelly v. Town of Hayward
219 P. 749 (California Supreme Court, 1923)
City of St. Louis v. Moore
190 S.W. 867 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1916)
Stephens v. Lemoore Canal & Irrigation Co.
135 P. 707 (California Court of Appeal, 1913)
McIntyre v. Board of County Commissioners
15 Colo. App. 78 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1900)
Davenport v. Buffington
97 F. 234 (Eighth Circuit, 1899)
City of Llano v. County of Llano
23 S.W. 1008 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1893)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
51 Cal. 418, 1876 Cal. LEXIS 67, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccullough-v-board-of-education-cal-1876.