Case Name: Seatonville School District No. 96, Bureau County, Illinois, and Spring Valley School District No. 99, Bureau County, Illinois, as Successor in Interest to Seatonville School District No. 96, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Howard Helm, Esther Helm, The Ladd Community Consolidated School District No. 94, Bureau County, Illinois, and The County Board of School Trustees of Bureau County, Illinois, Defendants-Appellees
Court: Illinois Appellate Court
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Decision Date: 1966-11-04
Citations: 76 Ill. App. 2d 144
Docket Number: Gen. No. 66-41
Parties: Seatonville School District No. 96, Bureau County, Illinois, and Spring Valley School District No. 99, Bureau County, Illinois, as Successor in Interest to Seatonville School District No. 96, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Howard Helm, Esther Helm, The Ladd Community Consolidated School District No. 94, Bureau County, Illinois, and The County Board of School Trustees of Bureau County, Illinois, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: Illinois Appellate Court Reports, Second Series
Volume: 76
Pages: 144–144

Head Matter:
Seatonville School District No. 96, Bureau County, Illinois, and Spring Valley School District No. 99, Bureau County, Illinois, as Successor in Interest to Seatonville School District No. 96, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Howard Helm, Esther Helm, The Ladd Community Consolidated School District No. 94, Bureau County, Illinois, and The County Board of School Trustees of Bureau County, Illinois, Defendants-Appellees.
Gen. No. 66-41. (Abstract of Decision.)
Third District.
November 4, 1966.
Perona & Perona, of Spring Valley, for appellants; Trimble & Trimble, of Princeton, for appellees.

Opinion:
Opinion by PRESIDING JUSTICE CORYN. Not to be published in full.