White v. Smith
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the City Court of Montgomery. Heard before the Hon. John G. Winter. The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion. The- act of 1890-91, page 1139, does devolve upon the Auditor a duty as to which judgment and discretion is to be exercised by that officer.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the City Court of Montgomery. Heard before the Hon. John G. Winter. The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion. The- act of 1890-91, page 1139, does devolve upon the Auditor a duty as to which judgment and discretion is to be exercised by that officer. The writ of mandamus can be awarded against a public official.only where the •act required to be done is merely ministerial in its nature. — United States v. Seaman, 17 How.. 225; Ex parte Thompson, 52 Ala. 100. The guide board to the Auditor’s duty in this matter is found in the words “and that officer shall find…
1Opinion of the CourtBrickell, C. J.
The act of the General Assembly, approved February 18, 1891, (Pamph. Acts, 1890-91, p. 1139), authorizes any person who by mistake has paid taxes which he ought not. to have’ paid, to apply to the commissioners’ court to have such taxes refunded. Upon such application being made, and the mistake being established to the satisfaction of the court, they may direct and order the probate judge to draw a warrant on the county treasurer in "favor of such person for the amount of county taxes shown to have been so improperly paid ; and the court may authorize the probate judge to certify to the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Allgood v. Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1916
- Bigbee Fertilizer Co. v. SmithSupreme Court of Alabama · 1914
- Melof v. HuntDistrict Court, M.D. Alabama · 1989
- Department of Ind. Rel. v. West Boylston Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1949