State ex rel. Burnett v. French

Citations

• 111 Kan. 820
• 208 P. 664
• 1922 Kan. LEXIS 355

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. High Schools — Method of Levying and Apportioning Taxes for Support of County and Rural High Schools — Statute Valid. Chapter 247 of the Laws of 192Í is held valid, and construed and held to mean that in counties situated like Reno with reference to county and rural high schools, a general high-school fund is to be raised and apportioned to all high schools in the county; that the words “funds for the support of said high schools” in the ' title mean the same as “county high-school fund” mentioned in section 1.</p> <p>2. Same — Construction of Statute. The grammatical inaccuracies contained in the act, including the title, leave the act susceptible to reasonable construction, and if properly construed its various provisions present no material inconsistency.</p> <p>3. Same — Construction of Statute — Last Expression of Legislative Will — Repeal of Former Conflicting Statutes. While the act contains no specific repeal by title of former statutes it is held to be the last expression of the legislative will touching the subject covered, before which all former conflicting legislative expressions must be deemed silent.</p> <p>4. Same — County and Rural High-School Districts Subject to Legislative Modification or Dissolution. Quasi municipalities like county and rural high-school districts are creatures, of the legislature and subject to legislative modification or dissolution; and the mere name used for one of these schools or districts is of negligible importance.</p> <p>5. Same. Certain questions discussed in the briefs held to need no consideration or decision in this action at this time.</p>