STATE ex rel. MURPHY v. BOARD OF ED.

STATE ex rel. MURPHY v. BOARD OF ED.
1939 OK 311
95 P.2d 103
185 Okla. 654
Case Number: 27341
Decided: 09/12/1939
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

STATE ex rel. MURPHY et al.
v.
BOARD OF ED., OKLAHOMA CITY, et al.

Syllabus

¶0 1. SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS--Members of Board of Education of Independent District in Good Faith Ordering Issuance of Warrants in Payment of Claims Against Appropriations Later Adjudged Illegal not Personally Liable to District.
Ordinarily, the board of education of an independent school district exercises discretionary powers in ordering the issuance of warrants in payment of claims against an appropriation approved by the excise board for school purposes, and in the absence of bad faith or of express statute or previous final adjudication prohibiting the particular expenditure for which the appropriation was made, the members of said school board are not personally liable to the district for such expenditure made during the protest period for purposes enumerated in section 12315, O. S. 1931, 68 Okla. St. Ann. § 341, merely because the particular appropriation is later declared illegal by the courts. (Following rule of Board of Education v. Cloudman, 185 Okla. 400, 92 P.2d 837.)
2. SAME--School Treasurer in Good Faith Paying Warrant Fair on Its Face and Duly Drawn on Appropriation Later Adjudged Illegal not Personally Liable to District.
The act of a treasurer of an independent school district in paying a warrant fair on its face and duly drawn on an existing appropriation is purely ministerial and he is under no legal duty to examine into the legality of said appropriation, and in the absence of bad faith is not personally liable to the district merely because the appropriation is later declared illegal by the courts. (Following rule of Board of Education v. Cloudman, 185 Okla. 400, 92 P.2d 837.)

Appeal from District Court, Oklahoma County; Lucius Babcock, Judge.

Action by the State on relation of Ellen Murphy et al., taxpayers, against members of Board of Education of Oklahoma City, the school district treasurers and their bondsmen, to recover for alleged illegal expenditure of school district funds. Demurrers sustained to petition, and judgment in favor of all defendants, and plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.

B. M. Parmenter and Harlan Grimes, for plaintiffs in error.
Tomerlin, Chandler, Shelton, & Fowler and John W. Swinford, for defendants in error New York Casualty. Company and American Surety Company of New York.
Maurice M. Thomas, for defendants in error National Surety Corporation, New Amsterdam Casualty Company and Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company.
Ned Looney, for defendant in error Standard Accident Insurance Company.
Hayes, Richardson, Shartel, Gilliland & Jordan, for other defendants.

WELCH, V. C. J.

¶1 This appeal involves the expenditure of the same funds as was involved in the ease of Board of Education of City of Oklahoma City, a Municipal Corporation, v. Dr. H. H. Cloudman and others, 185 Okla. 400, 92 P.2d 837, and in addition a similar expenditure for a portion of the fiscal year 1932-33. and is an action brought by taxpayers. The same propositions of law are involved herein as were considered in the Cloudman Case, supra, and the conclusions therein reached are applicable and controlling here.

¶2 The author of this opinion dissented in the Cloudman Case, and still entertains the view that the rule in that case is not sound, but nevertheless recognizes that the rule of that case in its full extent must be regarded as binding on the court in this case, and for that reason it must be and is followed here.

¶3 The order of the trial court in sustaining the several demurrers to the petition and its judgment in favor of all of the defendants is therefore affirmed.