Canby v. Board of Education of Sleepy Creek Dist.
West Virginia Supreme Court
Writ of error and supersedeas to a judgment of the circuit court of the county of Morgan, rendered on the 29th day of September, 1879, in an action of assumpsit in said court then pending, wherein S. Canby was plaintiff, and the Board of Education of Sleepy Creek District was defendant, allowed upon the petition of said defendant. Hon. John Blair Hoge, judge of the third judicial circuit, rendered the judgment complained of.
Read the full summary
Writ of error and supersedeas to a judgment of the circuit court of the county of Morgan, rendered on the 29th day of September, 1879, in an action of assumpsit in said court then pending, wherein S. Canby was plaintiff, and the Board of Education of Sleepy Creek District was defendant, allowed upon the petition of said defendant. Hon. John Blair Hoge, judge of the third judicial circuit, rendered the judgment complained of. Haymond, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case: This is an action of assumpsit brought by the plaintiff against the defendant in the circuit court of…
1Judgment of the CourtHaymoND, Judge
The counsel for the plaintiff and defendant in error rely upon the school-law passed by the Legislature on the 12th day of April, 1873. See Acts of 1872-3, p. 382. It is therefore necessary to ascertain what that law is, so far as it bears upon this case. The act is a very long one, but still it is essentially necessary to ascertain what it is, so far as it is applicable to this case, in order to a right and intelligent understanding of the case and the principles involved in it.
The 7th section of chapter 123 of the said Acts, p. 386, incorporates the board of education of each school…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Ratliff v. County CourtWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1889
- Thomas v. Town of MasonWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1894
- Poling v. Board of EducationWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1901
- Arnold v. HawkinsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1916
- Spurlock v. West VirginiaCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1892