In re Continuing Appropriations
Supreme Court of Colorado
The opinion of the court is in response to the following resolution and request of the senate. ' “Whereas, the Constitution, in section 33, article V, provides that no money ‘shall be paid out of the treasury, except upon appropriations made by law ; ’ and, “Whereas, certain acts of the general assembly have provided for continuing appropriations instead of specific appropriations, from the general or special funds in the hands of the state treasurer; particularly, the…
Read the full summary
The opinion of the court is in response to the following resolution and request of the senate. ' “Whereas, the Constitution, in section 33, article V, provides that no money ‘shall be paid out of the treasury, except upon appropriations made by law ; ’ and, “Whereas, certain acts of the general assembly have provided for continuing appropriations instead of specific appropriations, from the general or special funds in the hands of the state treasurer; particularly, the military law, the insurance law, the supreme court library law, the acts providing for the support of state institutions,…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Hayt
The purpose of the clause quoted in the question propounded, is to require legislative sanction for the disbursement of the public revenue, where such disbursement is not specifically directed by the constitution. While it is necessary that something more than a duty to pay must be shown, no set form of words is necessary to constitute an appropriation. It is sufficient in this regard, if the legislative intention clearly appears from the language employed. In no instance will an appropriation be inferred from doubtful or ambiguous language.
As to those appropriations designated in the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- People ex rel. Richardson v. SpruanceSupreme Court of Colorado · 1885
3Cited by31 opinions
- Colorado General Assembly v. LammSupreme Court of Colorado · 1985
- Barber v. RitterSupreme Court of Colorado · 2008
- State Ex Rel. Richards v. MoorerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1929
- Briggs v. Greenville CountySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1926
- State ex rel. Norfolk Beet-Sugar Co. v. MooreNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.