Board of Com'rs of Kiowa County, Kan. v. Howard
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit) |
| Citation | 83 F. 296 |
| Docket Number | 844. |
| Parties | BOARD OF COM'RS OF KIOWA COUNTY, KAN., v. HOWARD. |
| Decision Date | 27 September 1897 |
S. S Ashbaugh (L. M. Day was with him on the brief), for plaintiff in error.
C. F Hutchings (L. W. Keplinger was with him on the brief), for defendant in error.
Before SANBORN and THAYER, Circuit Judges, and RINER, District Judge.
This was an action brought by George R. Howard in the circuit court for the district of Kansas to recover certain interest claimed to be due upon 237 interest coupons detached from 79 refunding bonds issued by the board of county commissioners of Kiowa county. The petition was the usual form of petition in such cases, alleging the citizenship of the parties; that the amount in controversy exceeded the sum of $2,000 exclusive of interest and costs; that the bonds in controversy were duly issued under and in pursuance of an act of the legislative assembly of the state of Kansas entitled 'An act to enable counties, municipal corporations, the board of education of any city and school districts to refund their indebtedness,' approved March 8, 1879; that the plaintiff became the owner and holder of the bonds and coupons, for value, before maturity, and was, at the time the action was brought, the owner and holder thereof; and that when the interest coupons became due they were duly presented to the defendant for payment, but payment was refused. The petition concludes with a prayer for judgment in favor of the plaintiff for the sum of $7,110, with interest. To this petition the defendant answered, in substance, that the indebtedness for which these refunding bonds were issued consisted of 44 'railroad aid bonds' issued by the county to the Chicago, Kansas & Nebraska Railway Company, and $30,000 worth of outstanding county warrants. It further alleged that the 'railroad aid bonds' were issued within one year after the organization of the county, were issued for an amount beyond the statutory limitation, were void 'to the knowledge of all persons whomsoever,' and therefore did not, at the time the refunding bonds were issued, constitute a matured or maturing indebtedness against the county within the meaning of the statute; that the refunding bonds were ordered executed, signed, and issued by the board of county commissioners, the chairman thereof, and the county clerk of the county without any vote or assent having first been taken or given by the electors of the county upon the proposition of the issuance of said bonds; and that the bonds were therefore void, and no recovery could be had thereon, or upon the coupons in suit. To this answer the plaintiff demurred. The circuit court sustained the demurrer, and entered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff for the amount claimed in his petition.
Each of the bonds in controversy contains the following recital:
'This bond is one of a series of bonds of like amount, tenor, and effect, executed and issued by the county commissioners of said Kiowa county to refund its matured and maturing indebtedness heretofore legally created by said county, and in accordance with an act of the legislature of the state of Kansas entitled 'An act to enable counties, municipal corporations, the board of education of any city, and school districts, to refund their indebtedness,' approved March 8, 1879, and it is hereby certified that the total amount of this issue of bonds does not exceed the actual amount of the outstanding indebtedness of said county, and that all the requirements of the provisions of the foregoing act have been strictly complied with in issuing this bond.'
It is no defense to an action brought by an innocent purchaser who has invested his money in municipal bonds containing such recitals to allege that the 'railroad aid bonds,' which constituted a part of the indebtedness refunded, were void to the knowledge of all persons whomsoever, or that the county commissioners knew that the county had no matured or maturing indebtedness to refund. This recital was evidently...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hughes County, S.D., v. Livingston, 1,337.
...557, 32 U.S.App. 725, 733; Board of Com'rs v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 90 F. 222, 224, 32 C.C.A. 585, 587, 61 U.S.App. 41, 45; Board v. Howard, 83 F. 296, 298, 27 C.C.A. 531, 533, 49 U.S.App. 642, 645; Board of Com'rs v. Society for Savings, 41 C.C.A. 667, 101 F. 767. 8. It is assigned as error......
-
Bolton v. Wharton, 13255.
...purchaser who had no knowledge of or part in the diversion or waste." Board of Commissioners of Kiowa County, Kan. v. Howard (C. C. A.) 83 F. 296. In Town of Aurora v. Gates (C. C. A.) 208 F. 101, 104, L. R. A. 1915A, 910, it was held that recitals in bonds issued by authorized city officer......
-
Bolton v. Wharton, 13255.
...to deny that these bonds were issued to refund its outstanding indebtedness." Board of Commissioners of Kiowa County v. Howard (C. C. A.) 83 F. 296 was a case where a similar holding was had. Cases Cited by the Circuit Judge. The circuit judge cites Anthony v. Jasper County, 101 U.S. 693, 6......
-
City of Pierre v. Dunscomb, 1,379.
...32 U.S.App. 725, 733; Seward Co. Com'rs v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 90 F. 222, 224, 32 C.C.A. 585, 587, 61 U.S.App. 41, 45; Board v. Howard, 83 F. 296, 298, 27 C.C.A. 531, 533, 49 U.S.App. 642, 645; Barber Co. Com'rs v. Society for Savings, 41 C.C.A. 667, 101 F. 767. If upon any theory the bond......
-
Hughes County, S.D., v. Livingston, 1,337.
...557, 32 U.S.App. 725, 733; Board of Com'rs v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 90 F. 222, 224, 32 C.C.A. 585, 587, 61 U.S.App. 41, 45; Board v. Howard, 83 F. 296, 298, 27 C.C.A. 531, 533, 49 U.S.App. 642, 645; Board of Com'rs v. Society for Savings, 41 C.C.A. 667, 101 F. 767. 8. It is assigned as error......
-
Bolton v. Wharton, 13255.
...purchaser who had no knowledge of or part in the diversion or waste." Board of Commissioners of Kiowa County, Kan. v. Howard (C. C. A.) 83 F. 296. In Town of Aurora v. Gates (C. C. A.) 208 F. 101, 104, L. R. A. 1915A, 910, it was held that recitals in bonds issued by authorized city officer......
-
Bolton v. Wharton, 13255.
...to deny that these bonds were issued to refund its outstanding indebtedness." Board of Commissioners of Kiowa County v. Howard (C. C. A.) 83 F. 296 was a case where a similar holding was had. Cases Cited by the Circuit Judge. The circuit judge cites Anthony v. Jasper County, 101 U.S. 693, 6......
-
City of Pierre v. Dunscomb, 1,379.
...32 U.S.App. 725, 733; Seward Co. Com'rs v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 90 F. 222, 224, 32 C.C.A. 585, 587, 61 U.S.App. 41, 45; Board v. Howard, 83 F. 296, 298, 27 C.C.A. 531, 533, 49 U.S.App. 642, 645; Barber Co. Com'rs v. Society for Savings, 41 C.C.A. 667, 101 F. 767. If upon any theory the bond......