Wakefield v. Patterson

25 Kan. 709
CourtSupreme Court of Kansas
DecidedJanuary 15, 1881
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 25 Kan. 709 (Wakefield v. Patterson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Wakefield v. Patterson, 25 Kan. 709 (kan 1881).

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Ho ETON, C. J.:

This was an action in the nature of quo warranto, prosecuted by the plaintiff to try the right between himself and defendant to the office of school director of School District No. 16, in Allen county. The case was submitted to the court,.a jury being waived, upon the following agreed statement of facts:

“1. That School District No. 16, in Allen county, Kansas, 'is a public corporation, under the laws of said state.

“2. That the office of director of said school district is a public office, under the laws of said state.

“3. That in said school district there is a stone school building, owned by and belonging to said school district, and used for school purposes.

“4. That there is also in said school district a frame building known as ‘Germania hall/ which the school board of said school district rented for school purposes in April, 1879, for five years.

“5. That said Germania hall is situated five blocks north of, and on the opposite side of the street from the stone school house.

“6. That the clerk of said school district, in calling the annual meeting of said school district for the year 1880, used a form of notice furnished by the state superintendent of public instruction, calling said meeting to be held at the school house belonging to said district, on August 12, 1880, at 2 o’clock p. M., the same being the second Thursday of August.

“7. That in posting up said notices, as provided by law, the clerk of said district posted one of said notices on the outer door of said stone school house, and did not post any on Germania hall.

“8. That the annual meetings of said school district have always since its creation been held at the stone school house, and the bell of said school district used to call the qualified electors of said district together.

“9. That in the year 1880 the bell was not rung.

“10. That in the year 1880 (this year), on the day on which the annual meeting was called to be held, to wit, the [711]*71112th day of August., 1880, .the same being the second Thursday of said month, the clerk of said school district, about half an hour before the time for holding said annual meeting, decided to have the same held at Germania hall instead of at the stone school house.

“11. That of this decision at the time it -was made, the director and treasurer of said school district were ignorant. That the director did not learn of the change until about 2 o’clock p. M., when the clerk met him at the northwest corner of the square and told him he had had Germania hall ■opened up and swept out for the purpose of holding the meeting there, and the treasurer did not learn of it until he returned to the city, he then being away.

“12. That pursuant to this decision and determination of ■said clerk, he the said clerk notified those persons whom he saw, and sent a small boy to stand at the door of the stone school house and tell any who might come there that the meeting would be held at Germania hall.

“13. That quite a large number of those in attendance at Germania hall learned that the meeting was being held at ■Germania hall by the merest accident, and while on the way ■to the stone school house.

“ 14. That a large number of the qualified electors of said ■district never learned that said meeting was being held or was to be held at Germania hall.

“15. That several of the qualified electors of said district were expecting the bell to ring as usual, and waiting therefor before starting for said meeting, and not hearing any bell, supposed that no annual meeting was being held on that day, and were thereby prevented from attending.

“16. That a large number of the qualified electors of said school district never consented that the annual meeting should be held at Germania hall, or had any notice of any school meeting at Germania hall, among whomwas the plaintiff and fifty other electors of said district.

“17. That the clerk of'said district, after he got to Gtr-mania hall, and before the meeting there commenced, was notified by at least one qualified elector of said school district that Germania hall was not the place provided by law for holding the annual meeting; and he replied; that he did not ■care — he was going to hold it there anyhow.

“18. That after the meeting had opened and commenced business at Germania hall, certain other citizens, after having [712]*712started down to the stone school house, and learning on the way that the meeting was being held at Germania hall, and being thereby detained on their way to the meeting, called the attention of those assembled to the fact that that was not the place provided by law for holding the annual meeting, and objected to its being held there, but the director overruled the objection.

“19. That after this public notification that the meeting was not being held in the place provided by law, those qualified electors assembled, some thirty in all, proceeded to transact the usual business of the annual meeting, and as a part of it to vote for a director for the ensuing term of three-years. '

“ 20. That the defendant and George A. Amos, Esq., were each voted for for said office. That the defendant received 16 of the votes cast for said office, and George A. Amos 14 of the votes east for said office.

“20-|-. That immediately prior to the adjournment of the meeting at the hall, a motion was made to adjourn to the stone school house and hold a legal meeting, which motion was voted down.

“21. And after the business was transacted and the meeting adjourned, those assembled were notified by a citizen and qualified elector present that there would be a legal meeting held at the stone school house right away.

“ 22. That on the same day, to wit, the second Thursday in August, being August 12th, 1880, after the meeting at Germania hall had adjourned, the plaintiff and some nine or ten other qualified electors of said district who had not been notified of the meeting held at Germania hall, or taken any part therein, met at the stone school house because of the notice specified in No. 6 above, and the statute in such case-provided, as claimed by those participating therein, and being unable to gain admittance to said stone school house, and the directors and clerk of said district being absent, they organized sáld (as claimed by them) annual school meeting by electing a ghairman and clerk, as provided by law, and adjourned to-meet again in two weeks, to wit, on Thursday, August 26, 1880, at 2 o’clock p. M., at said stone school building, as an annual school meeting, and to transact the business of the annual school meeting.

“23. That after each of the above meetings had adjourned,, to wit, on or about the 14th day of August, 1880, the de[713]*713fendant J. W. Patterson was sworn in as director of said school district.

“24. That at the adjourned (as claimed by those participating) annual meeting held on the 26th day of August, 1880, at 2 o’clock p. M., at the stone school house, the director of said school district being absent and the clerk of said school district refusing to take any part in said meeting or act as clerk thereof, the chairman and clerk of the meeting, as organized at the school house on August 12th, 1880, acted as chairman and clerk of the adjourned meeting.

“25.

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

Related

Wycoff v. Board of County Commissioners
383 P.2d 520 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1963)
Miely v. Metzger
156 P. 753 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1916)
May v. State
63 S.W. 132 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1901)
Ex Parte White
28 S.W. 542 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1894)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
25 Kan. 709, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wakefield-v-patterson-kan-1881.