Schofield v. Watkins
Illinois Supreme Court
The complainants filed their bill in the Will County Circuit Court, alleging that the complainants were the owners of taxable property, in the school district, in the town of Plainfield, in the county of Will aforesaid, known as number seven, and hereafter more particularly described, all of whom, except one, reside in and are taxable inhabitants of the said town of Plain-field.
Read the full summary
The complainants filed their bill in the Will County Circuit Court, alleging that the complainants were the owners of taxable property, in the school district, in the town of Plainfield, in the county of Will aforesaid, known as number seven, and hereafter more particularly described, all of whom, except one, reside in and are taxable inhabitants of the said town of Plain-field. That divers other persons among the complainants, naming them, are the owners, and for a long time have been, of taxable property situate, lying and being in old district number one, in the said town, and are all…
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
It is urged as an objection to the power to levy a tax in this district, that at the time it was formed, one of the trustees was absent in California, and that but two acted in its formation. The law constitutes two members of the body a quorum to transact business. And when they concur in any act, which the board may legally perform, no reason is perceived why the act is not as legally binding as if all were present. When the legislature designated that number as a quorum for the transaction of business, it conferred upon them full power to perform all the duties devolving upon the board.…
2Cited by18 opinions
- Anderson v. Santa AnnaSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Trumbo v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1874
- Ames v. SchlaegerIllinois Supreme Court · 1944
- Dunham v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1870
- Hallenbeck v. HahnNebraska Supreme Court · 1873
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.