Murata

Murata v. Vernon School District

Good Law
1927 Cal. App. LEXIS 708·82 Cal. App. 91·255 P. 208
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 28, 1927Docket No. 5549.California729 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Craig, J.

— This is an original proceeding in mandamus to compel the admission of the minor petitioners herein to the public schools of the Vernon City School District.

The following facts are undisputed: The territory in which the petitioners reside was, prior to February 20, 1914, outside of any incorporated city, and situated in what was then known as the Fruitland school district of Los Angeles County. On that date the area involved herein was duly annexed to the city of Vernon, which at that time was, and now is, a city of the sixth class. However, no change was in fact made in the boundaries of the Fruitland school district at thé time of the annexation. It is recited in respondents’ return: “That at all times referred to herein the said district was, and now is, a duly organized and existing school district of the state of California, and that at all such times the said district was bounded by duly established and existing boundary lines within which, until December 6, 1926, was included the territory involved herein; that within one year prior to July 23, 1925, there was levied in said district, and in the territory involved herein, a school tax which purported to be, and which…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.