Court Opinion

ID: 9831830
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:24:07.21355+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:38.416998
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
Appellees urge that, even though the law which provided for the creation of the Ingle-side independent school district was not effective at the time of the election of the trustees, yet such trustees, so elected by the voters and performing the duties of the office, would be de facto officers, and that their status could not be questioned except by a quo warranto proceeding instituted by the state.
[3] In order for there to be a de facto officer there must be a de jure office. Lower Terrebonne Refining & Mfg. Co. v. Police Jury of Parish of Terrebonne, 115 La. 1019, 40 South. 443, 112 Am. St. Rep. 291; Bedingfield v. First Nat. Bank, 4 Ga. App. 197, 61 S. E. 30; Norton v. Shelby Co., 118 U. S. 425, 6 Sup. Ct. 1121, 30 L. Ed. 178; Williams v. Boyington, 147 N. Y. 426, 42 N. E. 184; Beresford v. Donaldson, 54 Misc. Rep. 138, 103 N. Y. Supp. 600; Village of Canaseraga v. Green, 88 N. Y. Supp. 539; People v. Albertson, 8 How. Prac. (N. Y.) 363. Hence any attempted election of trustees prior to June 7, 1919, was a proceeding, not only irregular and informal, but void.
Motion for rehearing is overruled.