Walton v. Channel
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from the District Court of the Eleventh Judicial District, for Twin Falls County. Hon. Wm. A. Babcock, Judge. Action for removal of officer for neglect of official duties and for payment of penalty. Judgment for plaintiff. Sec. 8684, C. S., is highly penal in its nature and should be strictly construed, and will not be extended to cover acts and omissions which do not come clearly within its terms.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the District Court of the Eleventh Judicial District, for Twin Falls County. Hon. Wm. A. Babcock, Judge. Action for removal of officer for neglect of official duties and for payment of penalty. Judgment for plaintiff. Sec. 8684, C. S., is highly penal in its nature and should be strictly construed, and will not be extended to cover acts and omissions which do not come clearly within its terms. (Coleman v. Wanamaker, 27 Ida. 342, 149 Pae. 292; Mc-Boberts v. Hoar, 28 Ida. 163, 152 Pae. 1046; Daugherty v. Nagel, 28 Ida. 302, 154 Pac. 375; Corker v. Cowen, 30 Ida. 213, 164 Pae. 85.)…
1Opinion of the Court
RICE, C. J.-
This is one of three actions instituted by respondent under the provisions of C. S., sec. 8684, to remove from office the commissioners of Twin Falls Highway District and recover from each the statutory penalty. The three causes were consolidated for the purpose of trial and appeal, and a separate judgment rendered against each of the commissioners. 0
C. S., sec. 8684, providing for the removal of an officer “who has refused or neglected to perform the official duties pertaining to his office,” is penal in its nature and should *536be strictly construed. By this is meant that the court…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Robinson v. HuffakerIdaho Supreme Court · 1912
3Cited by4 opinions
- Walton v. ClarkIdaho Supreme Court · 1924
- Sharp v. BrownIdaho Supreme Court · 1923
- Francis v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2012
- Walton v. ClarkIdaho Supreme Court · 1924