Pyke v. Steunenberg
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Bingham County. Is tbe state board of examiners vested with judicial discretion? We submit that this board is clothed with judicial discretion and is part and parcel of the executive department of the state. Article 4 of the constitution is entitled “executive department” and defines the duties of the executive branch of the state government.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court, Bingham County. Is tbe state board of examiners vested with judicial discretion? We submit that this board is clothed with judicial discretion and is part and parcel of the executive department of the state. Article 4 of the constitution is entitled “executive department” and defines the duties of the executive branch of the state government. Section 18 of said article 4 clothes the board with full power to examine all claims against the state, excepting salaries and compensation of officers fixed by law, and further provides that no claim against the state, except…
1Dissent
STJLLIYAN, C. J.,
Dissenting. — I cannot concur in the opinion of my associates. This is an appeal from an order and judgment of the district judge of the fifth judicial district granting a peremptory writ of mandate to the state board of examiners, commanding them to audit and allow two certain, claims that the petitioner, as receiver of C. Bunting & Co., a corporation, held against the state for goods and merchandise *620sold to it for use at its hospital for the insane situated at Blackfoot. One claim, for $813.43, was audited and duly allowed by the board of directors of said hospital on the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Wood v. StrotherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Danolds v. . the State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- McLeod v. ScottOregon Supreme Court · 1891
- Stockton & Visalia Railroad v. City of StocktonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1876
- State ex rel. Keane v. MurphyNevada Supreme Court · 1885
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.