43 P.2d 194 (Ariz. 1935), Civ. 3506, Ackerman v. Houston

Docket Nº:Civil 3506
Citation:43 P.2d 194, 45 Ariz. 293
Opinion Judge:McALISTER, J.
Party Name:ABRAHAM ACKERMAN, Appellant, v. CLARENCE E. HOUSTON, County Attorney, Appellee
Attorney:Mr. Abraham Ackerman, Appellant, in pro. per. Mr. Clarence E. Houston, Appellee, in pro. per.
Judge Panel:LOCKWOOD, C.J., and ROSS, J., concur.
Case Date:April 01, 1935
Court:Supreme Court of Arizona
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 194

43 P.2d 194 (Ariz. 1935)

45 Ariz. 293

ABRAHAM ACKERMAN, Appellant,

v.

CLARENCE E. HOUSTON, County Attorney, Appellee

Civil No. 3506

Supreme Court of Arizona

April 1, 1935

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of the County of Pima. Charles L. Hardy, Judge. Order affirmed.

Mr. Abraham Ackerman, Appellant, in pro. per.

Mr. Clarence E. Houston, Appellee, in pro. per.

OPINION

McALISTER, J.

In November, 1933, Abraham Ackerman presented to the justice of the peace of the Tucson precinct a criminal complaint charging Mrs. Eleanor Hill with the crime of perjury alleged to have been committed by her while testifying in a case entitled, "Abraham Ackerman v. Southern Arizona Bank and Trust Company," and requested that officer to file it and issue a warrant for the arrest of Mrs. Hill, but he refused. Some days later Ackerman took the matter up with the county attorney and requested him to proceed with the prosecution [45 Ariz. 294] but he likewise declined. So on the 12th of December, following, he filed in the superior court of Pima county a petition for a writ of mandamus in which he sought to have the court issue an order directing the county attorney, Clarence Houston, to file a criminal complaint against Mrs. Hill and all other guilty parties, charging them with the crime of perjury. The court, Honorable Charles L. Hardy, of Santa Cruz county, presiding, the local judge having been disqualified by the petitioner, denied the application and it is from this ruling that the appeal has been taken.

In the action in which the alleged false statement was used the plaintiff was seeking an accounting of the rentals collected by the bank on his property in Tucson, Arizona, during the years 1921 to 1924, and the recovery

Page 195

of a judgment for the sum he claimed such an accounting would show to be due him by the bank, something over $8,000. That action was tried in 1933 and at the hearing a check dated July 28, 1914, and drawn by Ackerman to the order of one Sam Hughes for $1,966, was shown the witness Hill, who was then asked concerning it by the attorney for the bank, whether or not the statement of Ackerman's bank account which she held in her hand disclosed that on July 28, 1924, a check for $1,966 was withdrawn through the account, and to this Mrs. Hill answered, "Yes." The check was indorsed by Sam Hughes, Sr., and had written on...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP