Brewster v. Springer
Oregon Supreme Court
From Crook: T. E. J. Dueey, Judge. In Banc. Statement by Mr. Justice Eakin. This is a proceeding in mandamus by George H. Brewster against G. Springer, county judge, and J. F. Blanchard and H. J. Overturf, county commissioners, sitting for the transaction of county business, to compel them to allow certain claims presented by the water-master of Cook County for services rendered by himself and assistant in their official capacities.
Read the full summary
From Crook: T. E. J. Dueey, Judge. In Banc. Statement by Mr. Justice Eakin. This is a proceeding in mandamus by George H. Brewster against G. Springer, county judge, and J. F. Blanchard and H. J. Overturf, county commissioners, sitting for the transaction of county business, to compel them to allow certain claims presented by the water-master of Cook County for services rendered by himself and assistant in their official capacities. Submitted on briefs without arguments under the proviso of Supreme Court Buie 18: 56 Or. 622 (117 Pac. xi).
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Eakin
1-3. Under the provisions of Section 6616, L. 0. L., the state board of control, now the state water board, is required to appoint a water-master for each water district. Section 6617 defines his duties. Section 6619 specifies that his compensation shall be at the *70rate of $5 per day while actively employed in the duties of his office, but contains the further provision that, where the service may be improved by continuous employment, he may, upon recommendation of the district superintendent and approval of the County Court, receive pay at the rate of $100 a month. The same section contains…
2Cited by4 opinions
- State Ex Rel. United Railways Co. v. EkwallOregon Supreme Court · 1930
- Irwin v. Klamath CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1919
- Brewster v. Crook CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1916
- Irwin v. Klamath CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1919