Hillard v. Shoshone County
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Sboshone County. It is the clerk of the district court who shall receive the compensation, not the auditor and recorder. (Lathrop v. Brittain, 30 Cal. 680; People v. Edwards, 9 Cal. 292; Kinsey v. Kellogg, €5 Cal. 112, 3 Pac. 405.) ■ When the constitution declares the amount to be paid an officer, it is an appropriation made by law, and no act of the legislature is necessary.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court, Sboshone County. It is the clerk of the district court who shall receive the compensation, not the auditor and recorder. (Lathrop v. Brittain, 30 Cal. 680; People v. Edwards, 9 Cal. 292; Kinsey v. Kellogg, €5 Cal. 112, 3 Pac. 405.) ■ When the constitution declares the amount to be paid an officer, it is an appropriation made by law, and no act of the legislature is necessary. (State v. Weston, 4 Neb. 216; Thomas v. Owens, 4 Md. 189; People v. Hoge, 55 Cal. 612-618; State
1Opinion of the CourtMorgan, J.
On the fourteenth day of April, 1891, the plaintiff presented to the board of county commissioners of Shoshone county his bill for services rendered as clerk of the district court for Shoshone county, as follows:
March 31st, 1891. To salary as clerk of district court, for the quarter ending March 31,1891............ $125.0i>
To certified copies of sundry indictments, commitments, journal entries and judgments, 524 folios, at 20 cents per folio............................. 104.80
Amounting in all to the sum of..................$229.80
Verified in due form by the plaintiff.
The said board, after…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Crooks v. MaynardIdaho Supreme Court · 1987
- Cunningham v. MoodyIdaho Supreme Court · 1891
- Givens v. CarlsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1916
- County of Ada v. RyalsIdaho Supreme Court · 1895
- In re Appeal of RiceIdaho Supreme Court · 1906
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.