Givens v. Carlson
Idaho Supreme Court
APPLICATION for writ of mandate. It must be presumed that the legislature intended to afford the county protection in the bringing of these suits by holding the prosecutor liable on his bond; hence to give the plain construction intended by the legislature, the $25 must be paid the attorney, since it is the duty of the court to reconcile and give force and effect to the statute, if possible.
Read the full summary
APPLICATION for writ of mandate. It must be presumed that the legislature intended to afford the county protection in the bringing of these suits by holding the prosecutor liable on his bond; hence to give the plain construction intended by the legislature, the $25 must be paid the attorney, since it is the duty of the court to reconcile and give force and effect to the statute, if possible. (Grice v. Clearwater Timber Co., 20 Ida. 70, 117 Pac. 112; Parsons v. Wrble, 21 Ida. 695, 123 Pac. 638; Swain v. Fritchman, 21 Ida. 783,125 Pac. 319.) This construction is especially applicable and…
1Opinion of the CourtMorgan, J.
This is an original application in this court made by the plaintiff, who is prosecuting attorney of Ada county, for a writ of mandate to compel the defendants, who constitute the board of county commissioners of that county, to approve and authorize payment of his claim for $25, which sum he alleges is due to him for services rendered in the foreclosure of a tax lien as provided for in chap. 58, p. 173, Sess. Laws 1913. An alternative writ of mandate was issued, which the defendants moved to quash, and the case was heard upon that motion.
Sec. 137 of chap. 58, supra, is as follows: “In case…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hampton v. Commissioners of Logan CountyIdaho Supreme Court · 1896
- McRoberts v. HoarIdaho Supreme Court · 1915
- Meller v. Board of CommissionersIdaho Supreme Court · 1894
- Hillard v. Shoshone CountyIdaho Supreme Court · 1891
- County of Ada v. RyalsIdaho Supreme Court · 1895
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Wright v. CallahanIdaho Supreme Court · 1940
- Powers v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 2014
- Hanagan v. Board of County CommissionersNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1958
- Kerry and Clara Powers, on behalf of themselves and the citizens of Wyoming and Cindy Hill, on behalf of herself and as the Superintendent of Public Instruction v. State of Wyoming and Matthew H. Mead, Governor, in his official capacityWyoming Supreme Court · 2014
- Taylor v. State of IdahoIdaho Supreme Court · 1941