State, Ex Rel. v. Bd. of Edn.

Ohio Supreme Court

State, Ex Rel. v. Bd. of Edn.

96 N.E.2d 413, 154 Ohio St. 469, 43 Ohio Op. 384, 1951 Ohio LEXIS 633

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided January 24, 1951·No. No. 32215·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

The respondent has authority under the provisions of Section 4838-5, General Code, to adopt a rule excluding from the public schools within its district children who have not been vaccinated. The enforcement of such a rule is not a violation of the constitutional right to religious freedom. State, ex rel.Milhoof, v. Board of Education of Village of Barberton, 76 Ohio St. 297,81 N.E. 568.

It clearly appears from the record that the board of education has performed its full duty as prescribed by existing statutes.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is, therefore, affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

WEYGANDT, C.J., ZIMMERMAN, STEWART, MIDDLETON, TAFT, MATTHIAS and HART, JJ., concur. *Page 471

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

The respondent has authority under the provisions of Section 4838-5, General Code, to adopt a rule excluding from the public schools within its district children who have not been vaccinated. The enforcement of such a rule is not a violation of the constitutional right to religious freedom. State, ex rel.Milhoof, v. Board of Education of Village of Barberton, 76 Ohio St. 297,81 N.E. 568.

It clearly appears from the record that the board of education has performed its full duty as prescribed by existing statutes.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is, therefore, affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

WEYGANDT, C.J., ZIMMERMAN, STEWART, MIDDLETON, TAFT, MATTHIAS and HART, JJ., concur. *Page 471

State, Ex Rel. v. Bd. of Edn., 96 N.E.2d 413, 154 Ohio St. 469, 43 Ohio Op. 384, 1951 Ohio LEXIS 633 (Ohio 1951).

Pincite

96 N.E.2d 413 (State, Ex Rel. v. Bd. of Edn.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related