Armstrong v. Truitt

• Decision Date: 17 May 1890
• Parties: ARMSTRONG <I>v.</I> TRUITT, (two cases.)
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

13 S.W. 934

ARMSTRONG

v. TRUITT, (two cases.)

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

May 17, 1890.

Appeal from circuit court, Conway county; G. S. CUNNINGHAM, Judge.

E. B. Henry, for appellant. Ratcliffe & Fletcher, for appellee.

BATTLE, J.

These two cases were submitted by consent upon the same abstracts and briefs, and considered by this court at the same time. In the first case it appears the county court of Conway county ordered a jail to be built, awarded the contract to R. S. Truitt, he being declared the lowest bidder, and ordered him to enter into bond for the faithful performance thereof. The contract was reduced to writing, and presented to the court for approval. Thereupon, Carroll Armstrong, a citizen, resident, and tax-payer of Conway county, appeared, and, for several reasons, objected to its approval. His objection was overruled, and the contract was approved, and he appealed to the circuit court. In the circuit court his appeal was dismissed, and he appealed to this court.

In the other case the county court of Conway county, at its July term, 1888, on the 7th of September, 1888, made the following order: "Now, on this day, it appearing to this court that the contractor for building the jail for Conway county, R. S. Truitt, has filed his bond as such contractor, and in accordance with the contract, that, upon the filing and approval of said bond, that said contractor should have issued to him one thousand dollars, it is therefore considered, ordered, and adjudged by the court that the clerk draw his warrant on the treasury of Conway county in favor of R. S. Truitt, payable out of jail funds, for one thousand dollars." And Carroll Armstrong appealed from it to the circuit court, which, "after hearing the testimony of witnesses and argument of counsel," affirmed the order of the county court, and rendered judgment for costs against Armstrong. Without filing a motion for a new trial or bill of exceptions, he appealed to this court.

The appeals in the two cases are separate and distinct, and will be so considered.

In the first case, Armstrong was not a party, and could not take an appeal as a party aggrieved. The order appealed from was not an allowance, but an acceptance by the county court of the offer of Truitt to build a jail, and nothing more. Hence Armstrong had no right to appeal from it, under the constitution, as a citizen, resident, or taxpayer, and could not appeal in any capacity. Const. 1874, art. 7, § 51; Moffit v. State, 40 Ind. 217.

In the latter case the order appealed from was an allowance against the county. There is nothing in the record here to indicate the nature or purpose of the allowance except the order of the county court. From that it appears that it was made at the time the contract to build the jail was consummated by the filing and approval of the bond of Truitt; that both were made at the same time. Assuming that the order...