{
  "id": 1894465,
  "name": "School District No. 3 v. Bodenhamer",
  "name_abbreviation": "School District No. 3 v. Bodenhamer",
  "decision_date": "1884-05",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "140",
  "last_page": "142",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "43 Ark. 140"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "34 Mich., 201",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Mich.",
      "case_ids": [
        1345292
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/mich/34/0201-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "26 Ohio St. 365",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ohio St.",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "26 Ark., 257",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "6 Ark., 9",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        8726457
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/6/0009-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "2 Ark, 338",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1848200
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/2/0338-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 226,
    "char_count": 2727,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.456,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.254289306377799e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7819077482895721
    },
    "sha256": "4a5b120ecda620c8007a9e4d2c706151cb4cde0f466bef323edca2ddcdaafab0",
    "simhash": "1:861165d60033ec24",
    "word_count": 474
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:16:37.449042+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "School District No. 3 v. Bodenhamer."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Smith, J.\nThis action was begun before a Justice of the Peace to recover a balance of $75 due for teacher\u2019s wages, pursuant to the terms of a written contract entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant\u2019s directors. The plaintiff hac1*judgment and the School District appealed to the Circuit Court. There, after a motion to dismiss and a demurrer for want of jurisdiction, the defendant declined to contest the matter further in that forum, and allowed judgment to go, and has appealed to us.\nBy Section 53 of the Common Schools Act of December 7, 1875, each School District is constituted a body corporate, with power to'sue and be sued in any of the courts of the state having competent jurisdiction. And the cause of action was within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Justice of the Peace. J There is no force in the suggestion that the plaintiff\u2019s remedy was mandamus to compel the directors to issue an order upon the County Treasurer for her wages. The writ of mandamus is frequently employed to compel public corporations to perform their duties towards their creditors. But there must first be a judgment to establish the validity and amount of the debt.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Smith, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "J. L. Abernethy, for appellant.",
      "J. Frank Wilson and Z. M. Horton for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "School District No. 3 v. Bodenhamer.\n1. School Districts ; May sue and be sued.\nBy section 53 of the common schools Act of December 7,1875, each school district is constituted a body corporate with power to sue and be sued in any of the courts of this State having competent \u2022 jurisdiction.\n2. Mandamus : Against School Directors\nMandamus to compel a public corporation to pay a debt can be employed only after judgment establishing the amount of the debt. \u2022\nAPPEAL from Baxter Circuit Court.\nHon. R. IT. Powell Circuit Judge.\nJ. L. Abernethy, for appellant.\nThis was a simple money contract for services rendered as teacher. If the directors made any such contract they exceded theirpo wers and authority, and the appellant'as a quasi public corporation is not bound. Story on Agency, Sec. 172; Perry on Trusts, Vol. 2, Sec. 475, 511. The directors may be personally liable, but not the district. 2 Ark, 338; 38 lb., 454. See School Act 1875 Secs. 61, 62, 67, Ac.\nMandamus was the proper remedy, after demand and refusal. Gantt\u2019s Dig., Sec. 4150; 6 Ark., 9; 26 Ark., 257.\nJ. Frank Wilson and Z. M. Horton for appellee.\nThe Justice of the Peace had exclusive jurisdiction. Const. Art. VII, Sec. 40, Clause 1.\nEach school district is a body corporate and may sue and be sued as such. Sec. 53, p. 71 School Act,- Dec. 7,1875, and the action of the directors bind the District, lb. Sec. 62.\n2. Mandamus not the remedy until after judgment. Wells Jurisdiction of Courts, Sec. 472 and notes ; 26 Ohio St. 365; 34 Mich., 201; 20 Hans., 404."
  },
  "file_name": "0140-01",
  "first_page_order": 164,
  "last_page_order": 166
}