Opinion
Opinion filed June 1, 1935.
1. SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS.
Court may not review action of state board of education in issuing certificate of qualification to county superintendent of public instruction unless board acted arbitrarily, corruptly, or fraudulently (Pub. Acts 1925, chapter 115).
2. SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS.
Certificate of qualification issued by state board of education to county superintendent of public instruction, not showing on its face that board did not observe statute prescribing qualifications of superintendent for the particular county, cannot be collaterally attacked by proof that it was erroneously issued; only recourse being application to board to revoke the certificate (Pub. Acts 1925, chapter 115; Priv. Acts 1929, chapter 525).
3. MANDAMUS.
In mandamus proceeding, by one elected to and inducted into office of superintendent of public instruction in Benton county, against hold-over to compel him to surrender the office, books, papers, and the like, court could not inquire whether relator had qualifications prescribed by statute applying to the particular county, since certificate of qualification issued by state board of education and not showing disqualification on its face was conclusive (Pub. Acts 1925, chapter 115; Priv. Acts 1929, chapter 525).
FROM BENTON.Appeal from Chancery Court of Benton County. — HON. TOM C. RYE, Chancellor. Mandamus proceeding by the State, on the relation of E.J. Clement, against O.P. Dodson. From an adverse decree, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
S.L. PEELER and C.N. FRAZIER, both of Camden, for appellant.
JOSEPH HIGGINS, of Nashville, and JOHN F. HALL, of Jackson, for appellee.
This is a mandamus proceeding involving the possession of the office of superintendent of public instruction in Benton county. Clement was elected to the office by the voters at the August, 1934, election, duly qualified, and was inducted into office.
Dodson, the hold-over, refused to surrender the office, books, papers, etc., upon the theory that Clements was not eligible to occupy the office, for the reason that he did not possess the qualifications prescribed by chapter 525, Priv. Acts 1929, which applies solely to Benton county.
The General Educational Law, chapter 115, Pub. Acts 1925, designates the qualifications of a county superintendent, and vests the exclusive authority in the state board of education to examine the applicant and issue to him a certificate if they find that he is qualified. The act confers no authority upon the courts to review their action in the premises, and, unless the board acts arbitrarily, corruptly, or fraudulently, the courts are powerless to review their decisions. This is necessarily so with respect to all licensing boards of this character where the power to review is not conferred upon the courts.
In O.P. Dobson v. J.J. Holland, Benton Equity, decided at Jackson on May 31, 1930, this court held that the acts of 1925 and 1929 are to be construed in pari materia. In the absence of an affirmative allegation in the certificate that the act of 1929 was not observed by the board when the certificate was renewed in 1933, it will be conclusively presumed that the board performed their duty in this respect. The certificate cannot be collaterally attacked by proof that it was erroneously issued. The only recourse in this situation would be an application to the board to revoke the certificate.
In 56 C.J., 377, it is said:
"A teacher's certificate is prima facie evidence of the teacher's qualifications, and of the fact that the board or committee issuing such certificate have properly performed their duty as to the manner and requisities of their issuing it, and in the absence of fraud cannot be collaterally impeached, as for example, in a suit by a teacher to recover his wages after being dismissed, or after destruction of the school by fire and failure of the board to provide other quarters, or in a suit between contestants to try title to the office of state superintendent of public instruction, or county superintendent of schools."
This principle was approved by this court in In re Bowers, 137 Tenn. 189, 194 S.W. 1093, where it was held that the certificate as to qualifications for practicing law, issued to the applicant by the state board of law examiners, was conclusive.
In the cause under consideration, the chancellor recognized the binding effect of the certificate issued to relator, and decreed the relief sought by his bill. His decree is affirmed.