Trumbull v. White

Headnote

Resolutions of a school-district meeting authorizing the levy of a tax, must specify some definite amount, and not leave that to be determined by the trustees at their discretion. Per Nelson, Ch. J.

Where, however, one of the resolutions directed the stim of $400 to be raised by tax to defray the expense of building a new school house, &c., and another authorized the trustees to sell the old school house, appropriate the avails to the erection of the new buildings, and raise the balance by tax ; held, that no discretionary power was thereby conferred upon the trustees in respect to the amount of the tax, and that they were therefore authorized to collect by warrant the balance of the sum specified, after deducting the amount for which the old school house was sold.

Error to the Washington C. P. White commenced a suit before a justice of the peace against Trumbull and two others, trustees of school-district No. 17, in the town of Easton, and declared against them hi trepass de bonis, <fcc. The defendants pleaded the general issue, and gave notice of justification. After trial, the justice gave judgment in favor of the plaintiff for $42,58 damages, whereupon the defendants appealed to the C. P. On the trial in that court, after the plaintiff had proved the taking of the property in question by one James under the direction of the defendants, the value, &c., the defendants introduced in evidence an order signed by them as trustees, directing the district clerk to give notice of a special meeting of the taxable

inhabitants of the school district, to be held at a time and place therein mentioned, for the purpose of talcing into consideration the propriety of building a school house, &c. It was then shown that a meeting was held hr pursuance of said order, and that the following resolutions were adopted, viz. 1. That the trustees be authorized to build a new school house, wood-shed and back-house ; 2. That $400 be raised by a tax to defray the expense of the erections; and 3. That the trustees be authorized to sell the old school house and appropriate the avails to the erection of the new buildings—the balance to be raised by a tax on the district. The defendants then offered in evidence a tax list, made out by them as trustees in pursuance of said resolutions, by which the taxable inhabitants of the district were assessed the sum of $373,28, (the balance of $400 after deducting the price for which the old school house was sold,) of which sum the plaintiff was taxed $42,28. The defendants then offered to prove that a warrant for the collection of said tax list was issued by them as trustees, and delivered to James, the district collector, who seized the property in question in virtue thereof. The plaintiff’s counsel objected to the admission of the evidence, on the ground that the sum directed to be raised by the district meeting was indefinite in amount, and the trustees therefore not authorized to make the assessment. The court sustained the objection, and the defendants’ counsel excepted. The jury rendered a verdict in the plaintiff’s favor for $43,50; and, after judgment, the defendants sued out a writ of error.