Legal Opinion

McDonald v. Bird

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1861PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from the Sixth District. Application for mandamus compelling the Treasurer of the city and county of Sacramento to pay certain warrants.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the Sixth District. Application for mandamus compelling the Treasurer of the city and county of Sacramento to pay certain warrants. Plaintiff is the holder of five warrants, each dated Aug. 12th, 1853, drawn by the Auditor of Sacramento county on the Treasurer thereof, “ payable from funds set apart for payment of county officers,” numbered respectively 121,123,124,125,126, each for five hundred dollars, except the last, which is for three hundred and thirty-eight dollars, and registered and indorsed on the day of date as “ not paid for want of funds.” It was admitted that no…

1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, J.

Field, C. J. and Cope, J.. concurring.

The Consolidation Act, applicable to the city and county of Sacramento, (Statutes 1858, 279) provides, by the thirty-sixth " section, that the revenue collected or accruing prior to the first of January, 1859, shall be apportioned as follows: Twelve per cent, to the School Fund, eight per cent, to the Pauper Fund, eighteen per cent, to the Salary Fund, twelve per cent, to the Contingent Fund, and the balance (fifty per cent.) to the *198General Fund, which shall be applied to the payment of outstanding Auditor’s warrants drawn on the Treasury in the order of…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. McDonald v. MadduxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. O'BrienMontana Supreme Court · 1896
  2. State v. ShaferMontana Supreme Court · 1898

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API