Opinion
Nos. 27809 and 27810
Decided April 17, 1940.
Schools — Transfer of territory — Mandatory duty of county board of education — Section 4696, General Code.
APPEALS from the Court of Appeals of Henry county.
These two controversies are again before this court following a former judgment of reversal and remand for further proceedings. A statement of facts appears in 135 Ohio St., beginning at the bottom of page 398 (21 N.E.2d, page 101).
The respondent county board of education refiled its amended answers in the Court of Appeals, asking for dissolution of the alternative writs and dismissal of the petitions in mandamus, and the relators filed replies thereto.
Shortly before the causes were set for trial, or immediately preceding the commencement and during the trials, there were filed with the county board of education withdrawals from the transfer petition, withdrawals from the withdrawals and additional supplemental petitions.
It was also developed that approximately three months after the mandamus proceedings were instituted the county board of education as a part of its plan of organization adopted a resolution creating a village school district from practically the same territory in Napoleon township, together with other territory which had been embraced in a formerly created rural school district.
The Court of Appeals rendered findings of fact and conclusions of law. The court ordered that peremptory writs issue commanding the county board of education to transfer the territory as described in the transfer petition, to make equitable distribution of funds and indebtedness between the districts and to do all necessary things to make the transfer effective.
Mr. Theo. Daman and Mr. P.C. Prentiss, for appellees.
Mr. A.P. Stalter, Mr. F.J. Stalter and Messrs. Knepper, White Dempsey, for appellant.
The underlying legal questions represented in these appeals were decided in State, ex rel. Adsmond, v. Board of Education, 135 Ohio St. 383, 21 N.E.2d 99, and succeeding pages.
There is ample evidence in the record to support the findings of fact of the Court of Appeals and its conclusions of law are in conformity with the former pronouncements by this court.
The judgments are therefore affirmed.
Judgments affirmed.
WEYGANDT, C.J., DAY, ZIMMERMAN, WILLIAMS, MYERS, MATTHIAS and HART, JJ., concur.