—there was an examination into the powers of school districts to enlarge and extend their course of instruction and it was held the statutes cannot be narrowly construed without doing violence to their intent.

—ruled that the school district was within its rights to levy taxes in support of a public high school.

—a court determined the power to lay and collect taxes for the support of secondary schools; see also Sawyer

—which was an action brought by a private party against a school-district nominally to restrain the collection of taxes levied by the district, but really to call in question the corporate existence of such school-district, Judge Cooley uses the following language, which seems quite applicable to the case at bar: “To require a municipal corporation, after so long an acquiescence …

The precedent-setting case in this area was the landmark 1874 decision of the Michigan Supreme Court, which held that the local board of education had the authority to maintain a high school

In the famous Kalamazoo case, the precedent which helped form public secondary schools in America, the court relied on broad implication of state policy, not explicit statute, to support its conclusion that a local school district could, with consent of the voters, expand its educational program to include high school.

—describing doctrine of acquiescence and noting that "[i] f every municipality must be subject to be called into court at any time to defend its original organization and its franchises at the will of any dissatisfied citizen who may feel disposed to question them,... it may very justly be said that few of our municipalities can be entirely certain of the ground they stand upon, and …

—he gave an opinion in the field of public education which was of national importance in the growth of tax-supported high schools.

Antonin Scalia, "Originalism: The Lesser Evil," University of Cincinnati Law Review 57, no. 3 (1989): 851-52. 14.

Avoiding teacher malpractice: A practical legal handbook for the teaching professional. New York: Hawthorn Books.

[CITATION] Austrian v. Guy