Poole v. Bagwell

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Poole v. Bagwell

111 S.E. 788, 119 S.C. 23, 1922 S.C. LEXIS 42

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedApril 11, 1922

Docket10854

StatusPublished

This text of 111 S.E. 788 (Poole v. Bagwell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Poole v. Bagwell, 111 S.E. 788, 119 S.C. 23, 1922 S.C. LEXIS 42 (S.C. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Cothran.

Ceriorari proceedings in the original jurisdiction of this Court to review the action of the State Board of Education on an appeal by the respondents herein from the action of the County Board of Education in reference to the location of a schoolhouse in Zion School District.

The local trustees unanimously selected a certain location: the opponents appealed to the County Board of Education; this board confirmed the action of the trustees; the opponents then appealed to the State Board. The latter acted, not upon the record for appeal, but sent one of their members upon a tour of personal investigation. He made a report favoring the location insisted upon by the opponents of the location selected by the trustees and approved by the County Board. The State Board, evidently acting upon this report and an ex parte statement of a distinguished educator of that county, reversed the action of the County Board of Education.

The State Board of Education is an 'appellate tribunal m such matters and is limited to the questions raised as they appear in the record for appeal. Sections 1707, 1736. Vol. 1, Code of Laws, A. D. 1912. They were without power to make an independent investigation of their own. Sarratt v. Cash, 103 S. C., 531; 88 S. E., 256. Upon the record before them the action of the County Board should have been sustained.

*25 The judgment of this Court is that the action of the State Board of Education under review be reversed, and that of the County Board of Education be sustained.

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

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Cothran.

Ceriorari proceedings in the original jurisdiction of this Court to review the action of the State Board of Education on an appeal by the respondents herein from the action of the County Board of Education in reference to the location of a schoolhouse in Zion School District.

The local trustees unanimously selected a certain location: the opponents appealed to the County Board of Education; this board confirmed the action of the trustees; the opponents then appealed to the State Board. The latter acted, not upon the record for appeal, but sent one of their members upon a tour of personal investigation. He made a report favoring the location insisted upon by the opponents of the location selected by the trustees and approved by the County Board. The State Board, evidently acting upon this report and an ex parte statement of a distinguished educator of that county, reversed the action of the County Board of Education.

The State Board of Education is an 'appellate tribunal m such matters and is limited to the questions raised as they appear in the record for appeal. Sections 1707, 1736. Vol. 1, Code of Laws, A. D. 1912. They were without power to make an independent investigation of their own. Sarratt v. Cash, 103 S. C., 531; 88 S. E., 256. Upon the record before them the action of the County Board should have been sustained.

*25 The judgment of this Court is that the action of the State Board of Education under review be reversed, and that of the County Board of Education be sustained.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 S.E. 788, 119 S.C. 23, 1922 S.C. LEXIS 42, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/poole-v-bagwell-sc-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack