83 N.Y.S. 667 | N.Y. App. Div. | 1903
The judgment should be affirmed, with costs-; the order reversed, with ten dollars costs.
The action was brought to enjoin the defendants from purchasing a site and erecting thereon a school building and raising the money by the issue and sale of bonds, and tax upon the school district to pay the Same.
The action is by a taxpayer finder chapter 301 of the Laws of 1892, and is based solely upon the ground that the acts sought to be enjoined are illegal. No bad faith, fraud, corruption, waste or extravagance is alleged; nor is it claimed that the best interests of the school ■district and its inhabitants are not being subserved. The objections raised are merely technical, that the law has not beeii strictly complied with in every step taken by the board of education. Under such circumstances, a court of equity will not struggle to find a way to set aside what has been done and to enjoin the continuance and completion of the project of furnishing the school district with a new and needed school building.
A special meeting of the inhabitants of the school district was held June 17, 1902, at which resolutions were passed designed to authorize1 the board of education to purchase.the site and erect the building, and raise the money to pay for the same by the issue of bonds :afid by taxation.
The notice and recommendation taken together are a sufficient, compliance with section 9 of the statute requiring the notice to state the tax proposed and specify the amount and object, thereof. The statute is general. The tax proposed here was $35,000, the object, was the purchase of a site and the erection of a school building and furnishing the same. The statute does not require the items to be separately stated.
At the special meeting a resolution was adopted directing the purchase of the site proposed for a sum not exceeding $4,900 and taking deeds of the same.
A resolution was also adopted directing the school building to be-erected on the site so purchased and a resolution was adopted that $35,000 be raised by bond and tax to pay for the site and building.
The resolution as to the erection of the' building was general. There was no description given as to the size or shape of the building. No plans or specifications were referred to. All these things, were left to the discretion of the board. The statute is general. It does not require the meeting of the inhabitants to give any specific directions upon the subject.
Pursuant to the directions so given, the board of education purchased the site, and took deeds _ thereof. October 6, 1902, they made a contract with the defendant Swanson, a contractor and builder-of Jamestown, to erect the school building on the site purchased for $26,570. The contractor gave his bond pursuant to the contract and soon after this action was commenced.
The trial court correctly disposed of the case. Equity will not interfere in a case of this kind where no bad faith or wrong is alleged and the public are in no way injured, and where the basis of the action is merely that all the technical, legal formalities have not been strictly complied with. When there has been a substantial compliance with the statute and forms of law, and the public interests are not suffering, the board of education will not be enjoined
We do not think this was a proper case for the granting of an •extra allowance of costs.
The judgment should be modified by deducting the amount of the extra allowance and affirmed, with costs, and the order should he reversed, with ten dollars costs.
All concurred.
Order granting extra allowance reversed, with ten dollars costs, and judgment modified by deducting therefrom the amount heretofore granted as an extra allowance, and as thus modified affirmed, with costs of this appeal.