Ind. Dist. of Mount Vernon v. Ind. Dist. of Harris Grove
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Ila/rrison District Court. In 1873 the boundaries of the plaintiff and defendant districts were changed by the action and concurrence of their respective boards of directors. The plaintiff claims that such action is void, because no such power has been conferred by statute on the directors of independent districts.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Ila/rrison District Court. In 1873 the boundaries of the plaintiff and defendant districts were changed by the action and concurrence of their respective boards of directors. The plaintiff claims that such action is void, because no such power has been conferred by statute on the directors of independent districts. The defendant has received certain taxes levied on the territory set over to it by such change of boundaries, and the plaintiff brought this action to recover the same. The defendant pleaded a counter-claim, for the tuition of certain children who attended school in the…
1Opinion of the CourtSeevers, J.
The principal question presented in the record was determined by this court in Eason v. Douglass, 55 Iowa, 390. Following that case, the judgment of the district court must be affirmed. Counsel for the appellee insist that the court erred in finding for the defendants on the counter-claim. It is sufficient to say that the plaintiff has not appealed, and that the appellant is content with the finding on the counter-claim, in the event the judgment of the district court is affirmed on the other branch of the case.
Affirmed.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Eason v. DouglassSupreme Court of Iowa · 1880
3Cited by1 opinion
- District Township of Center v. Independent District of LansingSupreme Court of Iowa · 1891