Court Opinion

ID: 9810755
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 21:57:30.110872+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:40:11.293333
License: Public Domain

Connob, J.,
dissenting: The judgment in this action is in accord with the opinion of the trial court that the Board of Commissioners of Meck-lenburg County has not been authorized by the General Assembly of this State to issue bonds of Mecklenburg County for the purpose of providing funds for the erection of teacherages in certain school districts of said county, notwithstanding the finding of the board of education of said county, approved by the said board of commissioners, that said teacher-ages are necessary for the maintenance and operation of schools in said districts as required by the Constitution of this State.
The General Assembly, by statute, has authorized the board of commissioners of any county in this State, after compliance with all the provisions of the statute, to issue bonds of the county for the purpose of providing funds for the “erection and purchase of schoolhouses.” M. C. Code of 1935, section 1334 (8).
*560There is in this State no statutory definition of the word “schoolhouses.” In the absence of such definition, I do not think that it can he held as a matter of law that a teackerage is not a schoolhouse. On the facts found by the trial court in the instant case, I am of opinion that the Board of Commissioners of Mecklenburg County has authority to issue bonds of said county for the purpose of providing teacherages for the school districts of said county named in the resolution of the said board of commissioners. Accordingly, I think the judgment in this action should be reversed.