Bremer Cnty. v. Schroeder, No. 36500.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Iowa
Writing for the CourtVERMILION
Citation200 Iowa 1285,206 N.W. 303
PartiesBREMER COUNTY v. SCHROEDER.
Decision Date15 December 1925
Docket NumberNo. 36500.

200 Iowa 1285
206 N.W. 303

BREMER COUNTY
v.
SCHROEDER.

No. 36500.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Dec. 15, 1925.


Appeal from District Court, Bremer County; M. F. Edwards, Judge.

Action by the County to recover from a son the expense of keeping, caring for, and burying his father, an inmate of the county poorhouse. From a judgment for plaintiff, the defendant appeals. Modified and affirmed.

[206 N.W. 304]

Sager & Sweet, of Waverly, for appellant.

Dawson & Wehrmacher and H. L. Leslie, all of Waverly, for appellee.


VERMILION, J.

The action is by the appellee county to recover of appellant the amount alleged to have been expended by the county in boarding and keeping A. B. C. Schroeder, appellant's father, at the county poor farm, and in furnishing him with medical attention and burying him. It is not disputed that the father was an inmate of the county farm from December 11, 1915, to his death on March 2, 1919, or that the amounts claimed were expended by the county in keeping him at the poor farm and in securing medical attention for him and for his burial.

[1] I. It is insisted by appellant that the action is in equity, and is triable here de novo. On the contrary, the petition was entitled in law, the action was essentially an action at law for the recovery of a money judgment only, and a jury was expressly waived by the parties.

[2] II. Appellant complains that no application was made to the district court by the township trustees for an order compelling appellant to maintain his father, as provided for in sections 2218 and 2219, Code of 1897 (sections 5302, 5303, and 5304, Code of 1924). It was not necessary that appellant's liability be first fixed under these sections in order for the county to recover. Boone County v. Ruhl, 9 Iowa, 276;Hamilton County v. Hollis, 141 Iowa, 477, 119 N. W. 978.

[3][4] III. It is insisted there was no proof that those who purported to act as township trustees in removing A. B. C. Schroeder to the county poor farm were such trustees, or ever legally qualified as such. The evidence shows they were holding the office of trustee, and were acting as such with the acquiescence of the public. They were therefore at least trustees de facto. The acts of the officers de facto are as valid and effectual, where they concern the public or the rights of third persons, as though they were officers de jure, and their authority to act cannot be questioned in collateral proceedings. Stickney v. Stickney, 77 Iowa, 699, 42 N. W. 518;State v. Powell, 101 Iowa, 382, 70 N. W. 592;Metropolitan National Bank v. Bank, 104 Iowa, 682, 74 N. W. 26, and cases there cited.

[5][6] IV. It is said there was no application to the trustees for relief of A. B. C. Schroeder as a poor person, as required by section 2234, Code of 1897 (section 5328, Code of 1924). It is settled the application may be made by another than the person to be relieved. Clay County v. Palo Alto County, 82 Iowa, 626, 48 N. W. 1053; Hamilton County v. Hollis, supra. There was undisputed testimony that A. B. C. Schroeder asked one Wernicke to help him; that he could not talk the American language very well, and wanted him to go with him to see the trustees because he was freezing to death and had no wood or fire; that Wernicke so informed the trustees, and they visited appellant and his father; that, after being informed that appellant had said “he wouldn't take care of the old gentleman, that he was through with him,” the father said he would have to go to the county farm. It is clear there was sufficient application by and in behalf of the father for public relief.

[7] V. It is also said there was no written order of the township trustees admitting A. B. C. Schroeder to the poorhouse, as required by section 2244, Code of 1897 (section 5343, Code of 1924), providing that:

“No person shall be admitted to the county home except upon the written order of a township trustee or member of the board of supervisors. * * *”

The steward of the poor farm might have refused to receive Schroeder as an inmate, in the absence of a written order, but, having received him, and the county having furnished him support there with full knowledge on the part of the board of supervisors, we fail to see how the fact that there was no written order for his admission in any way affects the county's right to recover from one liable for his support the amount so expended. In

[206 N.W. 305]

Collins v. Lucas County, 50 Iowa, 448, where a physician sought to recover of the county for services rendered to a pauper at the request of the trustees, and it was insisted his bill was not certified to be correct by the trustees, it was said it was competent for the board to waive the trustees' certificate, if satisfied of the truth of all that the certificate would show. In Clay County v. Palo Alto County, supra, which was an action by the county furnishing relief to recover therefor from the county of the pauper's settlement, Collins v. Lucas County, supra, was followed, and it was held such a certificate was not essential to the right to recover...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 practice notes
  • State v. Olson, No. 49158
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • November 12, 1957
    ...State v. Bates, 23 Iowa 96, 98-99; State ex rel. Hartnett v. Powell, 101 Iowa 382, 386, 70 N.W. 592; Bremer County v. Schroeder, 200 Iowa 1285, 1287, [249 Iowa 545] 206 N.W. 303; State v. Central States Electric Co., 238 Iowa 801, 818, 28 N.W.2d 457, 466; Walker v. Sears, 245 Iowa 262, 266-......
  • Humboldt Cnty. v. Biegger, No. 45981.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • June 16, 1942
    ...such liability. See Boone County v. Ruhl, 9 Iowa 276;Hamilton County v. Hollis, 141 Iowa 477, 119 N.W. 978,Bremer County v. Schroeder, 200 Iowa 1285, 206 N.W. 303. I appreciate that this court has held in Wright County v. Hagan, 210 Iowa 795, 231 N.W. 298, following Monroe County v. Teller,......
  • Cowles v. Indep. Sch. Dist. of Rome, No. 38148.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • November 15, 1927
    ...592;Metropolitan National Bank v. Bank, 104 Iowa, 682, 74 N. W. 26, and cases there cited.” Bremer County v. Schroeder, 200 Iowa, 1285, 206 N. W. 303;Herkimer v. Keeler, 109 Iowa, 680, 81 N. W. 178;Cochran v. McCleary, 22 Iowa, 75. [7] The plaintiff was warranted in accepting the employment......
  • State v. Cent. States Elec. Co., No. 47020.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • July 29, 1947
    ...were officers de jure, and their authority to act cannot be questioned in collateral proceedings.’ See also Bremer County v. Schroeder, 200 Iowa 1285, 1287, 206 N.W. 303;Cowles v. Independent Dist. of Rome, 204 Iowa 689, 699, 216 N.W. 83. IV. The intervenor has failed in this action because......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
9 cases
  • State v. Olson, No. 49158
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • November 12, 1957
    ...State v. Bates, 23 Iowa 96, 98-99; State ex rel. Hartnett v. Powell, 101 Iowa 382, 386, 70 N.W. 592; Bremer County v. Schroeder, 200 Iowa 1285, 1287, [249 Iowa 545] 206 N.W. 303; State v. Central States Electric Co., 238 Iowa 801, 818, 28 N.W.2d 457, 466; Walker v. Sears, 245 Iowa 262, 266-......
  • Humboldt Cnty. v. Biegger, No. 45981.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • June 16, 1942
    ...such liability. See Boone County v. Ruhl, 9 Iowa 276;Hamilton County v. Hollis, 141 Iowa 477, 119 N.W. 978,Bremer County v. Schroeder, 200 Iowa 1285, 206 N.W. 303. I appreciate that this court has held in Wright County v. Hagan, 210 Iowa 795, 231 N.W. 298, following Monroe County v. Teller,......
  • Cowles v. Indep. Sch. Dist. of Rome, No. 38148.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • November 15, 1927
    ...592;Metropolitan National Bank v. Bank, 104 Iowa, 682, 74 N. W. 26, and cases there cited.” Bremer County v. Schroeder, 200 Iowa, 1285, 206 N. W. 303;Herkimer v. Keeler, 109 Iowa, 680, 81 N. W. 178;Cochran v. McCleary, 22 Iowa, 75. [7] The plaintiff was warranted in accepting the employment......
  • State v. Cent. States Elec. Co., No. 47020.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • July 29, 1947
    ...were officers de jure, and their authority to act cannot be questioned in collateral proceedings.’ See also Bremer County v. Schroeder, 200 Iowa 1285, 1287, 206 N.W. 303;Cowles v. Independent Dist. of Rome, 204 Iowa 689, 699, 216 N.W. 83. IV. The intervenor has failed in this action because......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT