Opinion

Gray v. Ingleside Independent School Dist.

  • 220 S.W. 350
  • 1920 Tex. App. LEXIS 319
Court
Court of Appeals of Texas
Filed
Feb 28, 1920
Status
Published
On the bench
Buck
Cited by
13 cases
Authority
More cited than 12.3%

noting in dicta that place provisions are mandatory

How later courts described this case

  • noting in dicta that place provisions are mandatory

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

On Motion for Rehearing.

Appellees urge that, even though the law which provided for the creation of the Ingle-side independent school district was not effective at the time of the election of the trustees, yet such trustees, so elected by the voters and performing the duties of the office, would be de facto officers, and that their status could not be questioned except by a quo warranto proceeding instituted by the state.

[3] In order for there to be a de facto officer there must be a de jure office. Lower Terrebonne Refining & Mfg. Co. v. Police Jury of Parish of Terrebonne, 115 La. 1019 , 40 South. 443 , 112 Am. St. Rep. 291 ; Bedingfield v. First Nat. Bank, 4 Ga. App. 197 , 61 S. E. 30 ; Norton v. Shelby Co., 118 U. S. 425 , 6 Sup. Ct. 1121, 30 L. Ed. 178 ; Williams v. Boyington, 147 N. Y. 426 , 42 N. E. 184 ; Beresford v. Donaldson, 54 Misc. Rep. 138 , 103 N. Y. Supp. 600 ; Village of Canaseraga v. Green, 88 N. Y. Supp. 539 ; People v. Albertson, 8 How. Prac. (N. Y.) 363. Hence any attempted election of trustees prior to June 7, 1919, was a proceeding, not only irregular and informal, but void.

Motion for rehearing is overruled.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.