Case Name: The Ind. Dist. of Mount Vernon v. The Ind. Dist. of Harris Grove et al.
Court: Iowa Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Iowa
Decision Date: 1885-03-20
Citations: 65 Iowa 590
Docket Number: 
Parties: The Ind. Dist. of Mount Vernon v. The Ind. Dist. of Harris Grove et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Iowa Reports
Volume: 65
Pages: 590–591

Head Matter:
The Ind. Dist. of Mount Vernon v. The Ind. Dist. of Harris Grove et al.
1. Independent School Districts: directors cannot change boundaries of. Eason v. Douglass, 55 Iowa, 390, followed.
2. Practice in Supreme Court: rights of appellee. One who has not appealed cannot be heard to object to any part of the judgment appealed from.
Appeal from Ila/rrison District Court.
Friday, March 20.
In 1873 the boundaries of the plaintiff and defendant districts were changed by the action and concurrence of their respective boards of directors. The plaintiff claims that such action is void, because no such power has been conferred by statute on the directors of independent districts. The defendant has received certain taxes levied on the territory set over to it by such change of boundaries, and the plaintiff brought this action to recover the same. The defendant pleaded a counter-claim, for the tuition of certain children who attended school in the defendant district, for whose tuition the plaintiff was bound to pay. Trial to the court, and a judgment rendered that the plaintiff was entitled to recover the taxes, and also that defendant was entitled to recover on its counterclaim. The defendant appeals.
J. W. Barnhart, for appellants.
Smith & Clyde, for appellee.

Opinion:
Seevers, J.
The principal question presented in the record was determined by this court in Eason v. Douglass, 55 Iowa, 390. Following that case, the judgment of the district court must be affirmed. Counsel for the appellee insist that the court erred in finding for the defendants on the counter-claim. It is sufficient to say that the plaintiff has not appealed, and that the appellant is content with the finding on the counter-claim, in the event the judgment of the district court is affirmed on the other branch of the case.
Affirmed.