Johnson v. Board of Supervisors
ALBERT M. JOHNSON v. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF SACRAMENTO COUNTY
Syllabus
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
The Court.
This was a proceeding by mandamus to compel the payment of a judgment which the petitioner had recovered against the county. The defense set up is that the payment of the judgment will result in incurring indebtedness and liability exceeding the income of the county for the then current fiscal year, and that the board has no authority to provide for the payment of such excess from the revenue of the ensuing fiscal year.
If such a defense had existed, the proper place to interpose it would have been in the action in which the judgment was rendered. For aught that appears, that defense may have been there interposed by answer, and the issue tried and decided adversely to the county.
The order appealed from directed that the respondent be required to allow and pay the amount of the judgment. The order to allow is correct; but the board of supervisors does not pay demands; the treasurer is to pay; and it may be that when the warrant shall be presented there will not be sufficient money in the proper fund for the year.
The order is modified by striking out the words “ and pay,” and in all other respects it is affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.