Paulson v. Board of County Commissioners
Can I rely on this case?
Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.
(as of 9/30/2026)
Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1930, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.
Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error
Cases that cite this one
4 later published cases cite this decision.
- In re Appeal of Consolidated School District No. 16 (Minn. 1930)
- Rolf v. Town of Hancock (Minn. 1926)
- School Districts Nos. 61 v. School District No. 93 (Minn. 1923)
- Brazil v. County of Sibley (Minn. 1921)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Proceedings under the provisions of section 3677, G. S. 1913, for the enlargement of school district No. 83, Yellow Medicine county, by including therein and attaching thereto the following adjacent territory: All of school district No. 34 in Yellow Medicine county, consisting of sections 19, 30, 31, 38, 39 and 30, in township 114, range 44, and a part of school district No. 47 in the same county, consisting of all of section 33, the west half, the southeast quarter and the west half of the northeast quarter of section 37, and the east half of section 34, in township 114, range 44. Also a part of school district No. 6 in Lincoln county, consisting of the west half of sections 3, 10 and 15 in township 113, range 44, and a part of school district No. 34 in Lincoln county, consisting of all of sections 4, 5, 9, 16, and the north half of section 6 in township 113, range 44.
The proceedings were in all things regular, and after due hearing before the county boards of Yellow Medicine and Lincoln counties sitting together, the prayer of the petition was granted. The county board of Yellow Medicine county made its order granting the petition and enlarging the district by attaching thereto the territory in Yellow Medicine
School district No. 83 includes within its boundaries the incorporated village of Porter, which has about 250 inhabitants and a semi-graded school. The territory sought to be annexed lies contiguous to the village. The only contention urged by appellants upon this appeal is that the order of the county boards attaching such territory to district No. 83, was arbitrary, oppressive and unreasonable and that the trial court was in error in not so finding under the proofs in the case. We are unable to concur in this contention. The testimony before the trial court was not such as to warrant it in interfering with the decision of the county boards further than to eliminate the southwest quarter of section 35 from the territory attached to the school district. It has been uniformly held by this court that the determination of the county boards in such proceeding will be interfered with by -the courts only where the order is based on an erroneous theory of law, or when it clearly and manifestly appears that the decision is arbitrary, unreasonable and unjust, or against the best interests of the public. Brazil v. County of Sibley, 139 Minn. 458, 166 N. W. 1077; Common School District No. 85 v. County of Renville, 141 Minn. 300, 170 N. W. 216. The change was recommended by the superintendent of schools of each county and determined upon by
Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.