Hyperlawhypertext legal database Stevens v. Newcomb & Fellows 4 Denio 437

← Cases

Stevens v. Newcomb & Fellows

4 Denio 437 Court N.Y. Sup. Ct. English

Contents

Majority

p. 437
Stevens vs. Newcomb and Fellows.

Headnote

School district trustees, in justifying the taking of property for a tax on a warrant issued by them, are not bound to prove that the district was duly organized. It is enough for them to show that it had been organized in fact, and had acted as a regular school district.
Error to Onondaga O. P. Stevens sued Fellows and Newcomb before a justice, in June, 1845, and declared in- trespass for taking and selling his cows. The defendants were trustees of joint school district No. 10 in the town's of Clay and Lysander, which,' as they alleged, had been formed on the 4th day of April, 1845, by uniting district No. 10 in Clay, with district No. 15 in Lysander,' A tax was voted by the new join,' district to repair the school house and build a wood house: the
p. 438
defendants, as trustees, issued a warrant for the collection of the tax, by virtue of which the cows in question were taken and sold, to pay the plaintiff’s tax. The defendants proved the formation of the joint district by the proper documentary evidence. They then attempted to show the organization of the separate districts of which it was composed, and proved by the records that they were in fact organized and had acted as school districts several years before they were united, but they were unable to prove all the steps required by law for a complete organization. Objections in this respect were made by the plaintiff, which were overruled. The justice rendered a judgment for the defendants, which the O. P. affirmed on certiorari ; and the plaintiff brings error.
S. C. Parker, for plaintiff in error.
L. Morgan, for defendants in error.

None of the objections to the order forming the joint district were well taken. It will be presumed that the officers who signed the order were together at the time, until the contrary appears : and the order was valid, though it had only been recorded in one of the towns.

It was not necessary to go through all the steps to show that the original districts—No. 10, Clay, and No. 15, Lysander— had been duly organized. It was enough to show that they had in fact been organized, and had acted as regular school districts for several years before they were united in 1845. No one would dare to act as a trustee or collector, if a slip made by another officer ten or fifteen years before his time could make him a trespasser. (See 9 Wend. 35 ; 7 id. 341; Com. School Decis. 79, 197.) One of the districts had existed for seventeen, and the other for ten years, before they were consolidated. The plaintiff’s objections were not well taken.

Judgment affirmed.

Cases cited