WRIGHT, Aрpellant, v. BROWNING HIGH SCHOOL DIST., Respondent.
No. 9132.
Supreme Court of Montana
Submitted January 17, 1952. Decided February 14, 1952.
240 Pac. (2d) 862
We are sending this criminal cause back to the justice‘s court for plea and for trial without further delay should the plea raise an issue. Accordingly the rulings and orders made and entered on or about the 19th day of February 1951, by the relator as justice of the peace presiding in criminal case No. 7582 are approved and made effective from date of original entry by relator, — findings and orders of the respondent the district court in case No. 25689 are annulled, —its judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded with directions to dismiss ab initio the proceedings had and done in the respondent district сourt against the relator, Emil Borberg, as justice of the peace and his court. It is so ordered.
ASSOCIATE JUSTICES METCALF, BOTTOMLY, FREEBOURN and ANGSTMAN concur.
Rehearing denied February 28, 1952.
Mr. Arnold H. Olsen, Atty. Gen., Mr. Robert L. Word, Jr., Special Asst. Atty. Gen., Mr. Lloyd A. Murrills, County Atty., Cut Bank, for respondent.
Mr. Randall Swanberg, Great Falls, Mr. Otto T. Habedank, Sidney, amici curiae.
Mr. Wertz and Mr. Word argued orally.
MR. JUSTICE ANGSTMAN:
Plaintiff who residеs in School District No. 9 of Glacier county and who is a taxpayer therein brought this action to restrain defendant from issuing bonds in the sum of $200,000 and for a declaratory judgment declaring Chapter 275, Laws of 1947, void and declaring that defendant has no legal existence and hence no authority to issue bonds.
The facts are set out in the pleadings and in legal effect are agreed to.
The importаnt facts are succinctly set forth in the court‘s findings of fact, substantially as follows: That on or about December 6, 1949, the county commissiоners of Glacier county, together with the county superintendent of schools, passed a resolution dividing Glacier county into two high school districts, one of which is defendant Browning High School District; that defendant district is composed of common school districts 1, 7, 8, 9 аnd 50 of Glacier county; that on April 7, 1951, the qualified electors of defendant district, by a majority vote, authorized the issuance and sаle of bonds by defendant district in the amount of $200,000 for the purpose of
The district court concluded that Chapter 275, Laws of 1947, and the amendments thereto are unconstitutional only so far as they attempt to permit or authorize the creation of an indebtedness by a high school district in the full amount authorized by
The district court found that defendant Browning High School District is a valid and subsisting school district composed of common school districts Nos. 1, 7, 8, 9 and 50, and that defendant may issue bonds so long as the indebtedness of the high school district, when divided among the common school districts comprising said Browning High School District in propоrtion to the assessed valuation in each such district and portions thus divided are added to the existing indebtedness of each such district respectively, does not exceed five percent of the assessed valuation of the taxable property in any of such common school districts. The district court denied the restraining order. From the judgment entered plaintiff has appealed.
Chapter 275, Laws of 1947, is very similar to Chapter 47 of the Twenty-third Extraordinary Session of 1933-34, and which became sections 1301.1, et seq., R. C. M. 1935.
The most important difference between the two is that Chapter 275, by its express terms, undertakes to grant authority to the high school districts there provided for to incur indebted-
When Chapter 47, supra, was before this court in Pierson v. Hendricksen, 98 Mont. 244, 38 Pac. (2d) 991, its validity as affected by
In House v. School District No. 4 of Park County, 120 Mont. 319, 184 Pac. (2d) 285, in a three to two opinion the majority sustained the right of a common schоol district to incur an indebtedness to the full extent authorized by
The question again came before this court in Rankin v. Love, 125 Mont. 184, 232 Pac. (2d) 998, 1001. After that case was commenced but befоre it reached this court for decision, the three per cent constitutional limit of indebtedness was raised by amendment to five percent. The statutory limit was likewise changed to conform to the constitutional change. Chapter 65, Laws of 1951. The latter case expressly overruled the majority opinion in the House Case and held Chapter 275 invalid. As to the latter point the majority opinion in the Rankin Case said: “Contravening
Since the Constitution had been amended between the time the Rankin case was cоmmenced and the time it was decided by this court, the case stood as did that of Pierson v. Hendricksen, 98 Mont. 244, 38 Pac. (2d) 991, viz., the record revealed that the debt limit had not bеen reached or exceeded. The
We now reaffirm the holding in the Pierson case and in the Rankin case to that effect.
The district court was right in denying the restraining order and in entering judgment in favor of defendants.
The judgment is affirmed. Remittitur to issue forthwith.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE ADAIR and ASSOCIATE JUSTICES BOTTOMLY and FREEBOURN, concur.
MR. JUSTICE METCALF: (Concurring in part).
I concur in the result.
