xt70zp3vt865_288 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt70zp3vt865/data/mets.xml https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt70zp3vt865/data/63m46.dao.xml unknown 14 Cubic Feet 31 boxes archival material 63m46 English University of Kentucky Copyright has not been assigned to the University of Kentucky.  Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Harkins Family papers Mineral rights -- Kentucky -- Floyd County -- History. Law reports, digests, etc. -- Kentucky. Mining leases -- Kentucky -- Floyd County -- History. Practice of law -- Kentucky. Bankers -- Kentucky. Banks and banking -- Kentucky -- Prestonsburg. Coal trade -- Kentucky -- Floyd County -- History. Lawyers -- Kentucky. Porter, Henry v. Hunter, Ballard, superintendent of schools of Floyd County Kentucky text Porter, Henry v. Hunter, Ballard, superintendent of schools of Floyd County Kentucky 2016 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt70zp3vt865/data/63m46/Box_26/Folder_12/8014.pdf 1936 1936 1936 section false xt70zp3vt865_288 xt70zp3vt865 BEFORE THE FLOYD COUNTY 1 ‘
BOARD OF EDUCATION ‘
HENRY PORTER COMPLAINANT
vs /// MOTION '
BALLARD HUNTER, SUPERINTENDENT OF
SCHOOLS OF FLOYD COUNTY, KENTUCKY RESPOMJENT.
The Respondent, Ballard Hunter, enters motion for
rule against the complainant herein to make certain and
definite the averments and allegations mentioned, set out,
and contained in Paragraphs Numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, ‘7, 8,
' 9, 10, ll, 12, 13, 14, 14-a, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22,
23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33 of the charges
and grounds for removal herein. -
BALLARD HUNTER,
BY
ATTORNEY.
WALTER S. HARKINS, JR” AND
‘ WOODROW BURCHETT, OF COUNSEL.
V , . .. ~ ' A 1‘“ ..V , . - g V

 BEFORE THE FLOYD COUNTY
BOARD OF EDUCATION
HENRY PORTER EOMPLAINANT
vs /// DEMURRER

BALLARD HUNTER, SUPERJNTENDENT OF
SCHOOLS OF FLOYD COUNTY, KENTUCKY RESPONDENT. ‘

The Respondent, Ballard Hunter, demurs to Paragraphs
Number 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, ll, 12, l3, 14, 15, 16, ;
17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 2'7, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32,
and 33, seperately, including Paragraph l4-a, of the charges
and grounds for removal filed herein against him, and to the

\
said charges and grounds for removal as a whole and for cause
assigns: That said paragraphs and each of them and said ;
charges and grounds as a whole do not state facts sufficient I
to consitutute or support grounds for removal against the
respondent herein.
BALJARD HUNTER,
BY
ATTORNEY.

Walter S. Harkins, Jr., and
Woodrow Burchett,
of counsel.

 51* é“
BEFORE THE FLOYD‘ COUNTY BOARD
We
HENRY PORTER COMPLAINANT
VS /7/' RESPONSE
BALLARD HUNTER RESPONDENT ’
The respondent, Ballard Hunter, Superintendent of
Schools of Floyd Ccunty School District, says that it is
untrue and he denies that the complainant, Henry Porter, is
now, or was atzany of the times mentioned and referred to
in the paper termed “Charges and Grounds for Removal" a tax
payer within the Floyd County School District, or in the
county of Floyd or in the State of Kentucky; respondent
denies that he has wrongfully or unlawfully or neglectfully
or illegally or unofficially or at all failed or refused or
neglected to devote himself exclusively to his duties as
Superintendent of Schdols, or that on the contrary the respon- ' .
Adent has indulged or engaged himself in numerous undertakings
foreign to his duties as Superintendent of Schools; denies
that any conduct of this respondent has been or is unlawfully
Page -1- 1

 . ~

or neglectful.or that said allegedlunlawful or said alleged
neglectful conduct of the respondent is contrary to or viola-
tion of Section 4399-34 of Kentucky Statutes, Carrol's 1934
supplement to the l§30 edition, or that by reason of such
alleged violations, or otherwise, or at all, the respondent
herein forfeited his right to hold the office of Superintendent
of Schools of Floy'd'County, hentucky, or that he should be
removed from said office. He again denies that there has been

I any unlawful or illegal.neglect of duties by him or that said
alleged unlawful or illegal neglect of duties Was or is Wanton
or gross or has been indulged in or commited by the respondent
to the great or irreparable or any injury or detriment of the
entire school system of the Floyd County School District, or
any part thereof; he denies that he violated the statute
herein mentioned and referred to by taking active part in the
prosecution of a contest proceeding in which Jack Branham,
alleged henchman and alleged allie of the respondent, is the
contestant or plaintiff, or that respondent has, during such
time, been away from his office or neglecting orfailing to
attend to the duties thereof; he denies that he has taken
an active part in the prosecution of said contest proceeding
and that.Jack Branham is a political henchman or allie of the

» respondent in the derogatory sense in which said phrase is,
attempted to be used in said charges and grounds for removal;
respondent denies that his fhrther or unlawful or wrongfully
or neglectfully failing or refusing to devote himself exclu-
sively toihe duties of his office or that on the contrary or
in the place or stead of devoting himself exclusive to said
office has either willfully or Wantonly or intentionally
engaged in or practicgd pargisan politics by campaigning or

age - -

 . ,
speaking for certain candidates alleged to have been put out
by and run for the respondent for office as Member of the Board
' of Education of Floyd County, or that any campaigning or speaks ‘
ing done by this respondent is wrongful, unlawful or violation
of Section 4399-34 of the Kentucky Statutes or any other
section of said Statute.
For response to Ground 2, the respondent says that

it is untrue and hecbnies that he has unlawfully or illegally
or wantonly or neglectfully failed or refused or neglected to
exercise general supervision ofihe schools in the Floyd County
School district or to examine their condition or progress as
required by Section 4399-34 of the 1934 supplement Carrol's
Kentucky Statute, edition of 1930, or that said alleged con-
duct on the part of the respondent was done or committed more
especially or at all by his alleged failure or neglect to

visit all or a substantial part of“the schools of said district
for the school term 1934-35, or t hat he has illegally or

wantonly or at all beglected to examine their condition or
progress or has otherwise or at all neglected to supervise or
examine or inspect the school of said school district to the
end that numerous or any schools have been neglected; he denies
that aly schools of said school district has been neglected;
respondent says that it is untrue and he denies that he further
or at all either unlawfully or illegally or wantonly or
neglectfully failed or refused to visit or examine or inspect
or supervise the rural schools of Floyd County or a substantial
part of them for or during the school term 1935-36, orighat as
a result of all or any of said alleged neglect of duty by the
respondent as aforesaid, or at all. he has forfeited his right
to hold the office of Superintendent of Schools as aforesaid,

’ PAGE ~3- . A

 . r
qr at all, or should be:removed therefrom. _
Forr'esponse to ground 3, the respondent says that it
is untrue and he