Richardson v. Bd. of Educ. of Sch. Dist. No. 100, Keya Paha County High Sch. Dist., 206 Neb. 18

Summary

The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed a judgment requiring a Class VI school district to pay 75 percent of tuition incurred for the plaintiff's children to attend an accredited high school in South Dakota. The court held that the State Board of Education acted in a quasi-judicial capacity and that its unappealed order became final, precluding the school district's collateral attack on the order and the constitutionality of the governing statute.

Holdings

1. The State Board of Education acted in a quasi-judicial capacity when hearing and deciding an appeal concerning tuition payment under § 79-1103.05(2), and either party could seek judicial review of its order in the district court by petition in error or direct appeal as provided by law.
2. The school district could not collaterally attack the State Board's order because it had jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter, the district failed to pursue a timely appeal, and the order was therefore final and at most voidable rather than void.
3. The constitutionality of § 79-1103.05 was not properly before the Supreme Court because the school district had not timely appealed the State Board's order and had not complied with the Nebraska Supreme Court's notice and service requirements for constitutional challenges.
4. The district court properly entered judgment for Richardson because the undisputed evidence established the issuance of the State Board's order and the amount of tuition Richardson paid.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the State Board of Education acted in a quasi-judicial capacity when deciding an appeal under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 79-1103.05(2), such that its order was subject to judicial review.
2. Whether the school district could collaterally attack the State Board's order in Richardson's action to collect the tuition payment after failing to timely appeal the order.
3. Whether the constitutionality of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 79-1103.05 could be considered in the enforcement action.
4. Whether the district court properly entered judgment for Richardson based on the State Board's order and the amount of tuition paid.

Disposition

affirmed