Legal Opinion

Ward v. Whitfield

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided November 19, 1931No. 6 Div. 30PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGardner, J.

The purpose of this litigation is to test the constitutionality of the act approved May 27, 1931, which provides, in counties of 300,000 or more inhabitants, for the payment into the county treasury of all official or trust funds coming into the possession of the county officers and employees.

That the circuit clerk is a constitutional county officer (section 165, Constitution 1901) and the proper custodian of funds paid into court (Coleman v. Ormond, 60 Ala. 328) may be freely conceded. His duties, however, are not defined by the Constitution, but left largely to legislative .enactment.…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Kennedy v. BrunstWisconsin Supreme Court · 1870
  2. Howard v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
  3. Fortune v. Commissioners.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
  4. Ex parte LambertSupreme Court of Alabama · 1875
  5. State ex rel. Gaston v. BlackSupreme Court of Alabama · 1917

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Russum v. County Commission of Jefferson CountySupreme Court of Alabama · 1931
  2. St. John v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
  3. Price v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API