Cheek v. Tilley
Indiana Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Dearborn Circuit Court. Suit by the appellee against Cheek and Arnold. The complaint alleges, that Cheek, as clerk of Dearborn county, on the 15th of February, 1864, contracted with the apjjellee to act as his deputy, their contract being set forth in a certain writing, as follows:— “State of Indiana, Dearborn County, Set.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Dearborn Circuit Court. Suit by the appellee against Cheek and Arnold. The complaint alleges, that Cheek, as clerk of Dearborn county, on the 15th of February, 1864, contracted with the apjjellee to act as his deputy, their contract being set forth in a certain writing, as follows:— “State of Indiana, Dearborn County, Set. “I, John E. Cheek, clerk of the courts of Dearborn county, Indiana, do hereby constitute and appoint William Wirt Tilley my deputy during my term of office, his compensation to be one-half of the fees taxed and collectable in said office. Witness my hand,…
1Opinion of the CourtFrazer, J.
There was no error in allowing the amendment to the complaint, for such it was, though it is miscalled a supplemental complaint. It contains no supplemental matter. A party has a right by statute to amend ■ his complaint before answer. 2 Q-. & II. 117.
The contract between the parties does not show an attempt to sell an office, but merely the appointment of a deputy and an agreement that for his compensation the latter shall share the emoluments of the office. In all this there is nothing in contravention of public policy, as is suggested in argument. We can conceive of no valid objection to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Becker v. Ten EyckNew York Court of Chancery · 1836
3Cited by5 opinions
- Stern v. State Board of Dental ExaminersWashington Supreme Court · 1908
- Conner v. CanterIndiana Court of Appeals · 1896
- State Ex Rel. Department of Public Welfare v. Circuit CourtIndiana Supreme Court · 1943
- Knott v. HawleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Glass v. HarwellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1929