State ex rel. Black v. State Board of Education
Idaho Supreme Court
Original application for writ of prohibition. So far as any of these funds constitute trust funds, or moneys held by the state for a specific purpose and no other, irrespective of any constitutional proviso giving the board of regents any power over them, they would, by reason of their character as trust funds alone, be not subject to the constitutional provision requiring appropriation and requiring allowance of claims against them by the board of examiners.
Read the full summary
Original application for writ of prohibition. So far as any of these funds constitute trust funds, or moneys held by the state for a specific purpose and no other, irrespective of any constitutional proviso giving the board of regents any power over them, they would, by reason of their character as trust funds alone, be not subject to the constitutional provision requiring appropriation and requiring allowance of claims against them by the board of examiners. (State v. Iverson, 125 Minn. 67, 145 N. W. 607; Commonwealth v. Dollar Savings Baoik, 259 Pa. 138, 102 Atl. 569, 1 A. L. R. 1048; State…
1Dissent
DUNN, J.,
Dissenting in Part. — I concur fully in the decision of the majority of the court that claims against the state university or the board of regents are not required to be- submitted to the state board of examiners, and that to require such claims to be submitted to said board would make it possible for the board of examiners to take away from the board of regents the power and authority granted by art. 9, sec. 10, of the state constitution, but I am not able to accept their conclusion that such claims are not claims against the state.
My opinion that such claims are claims against the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Thomas v. StateIdaho Supreme Court · 1909
- First National Bank v. Regents of UniversityIdaho Supreme Court · 1914