In the event of a disagreement between the board of a school district and the board of
an area education agency, the board of the school district may appeal to the director of the
department of education and the procedure and times provided for in section 285.12 shall
prevail in any such case. The decision of the director shall be subject to judicial review in
accordance with the terms of the Iowa administrative procedure Act, chapter 17A.
[C46, 50, 54, 58, 62, 66, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 81, §285.13]
85 Acts, ch 212, §21; 2003 Acts, ch 44, §114
Referred to in §285.4
\n
Notes of Decisions
Ctr. Twp. Sch. Dist. v. Oakland Indep. Sch. Dist., 104 N.W.2d 454 (Iowa 1960).
· cites it 6× “Defendants Oakland District and Countj'- Board of Education filed special appearances asserting the court had no jurisdiction of the subject matter of the action because plaintiff had not appealed the disagreement to the state superintendent of public instruction under Code…”
Sch. Dist. of Soldier Twp. v. Moeller, 73 N.W.2d 43 (Iowa 1955).
· cites it 2× “12 and section 285.13.” It will be noted that the action to be taken by the board in regard to designating elementary pupils to other schools is predicated upon a closing of the school “for lack of pupils or by action of the board.”
Novak v. Oneida Twp. Sch. Bd., 95 N.W.2d 291 (Iowa 1959).
· cites it 4× “12 and section 285.13.” These appeals to the state superintendent are the only appeals authorized by section 285.”
Ctr. Twp. Sch. Dist. v. OAKLAND IND. SCH. DIST., 104 N.W.2d 454 (Iowa 1960).
· cites it 6× “Defendants Oakland District and county board of education filed special appearances asserting the court had no jurisdiction of the subject matter of the action because plaintiff had not appealed the disagreement to the state superintendant of public instruction under Code…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.