Calhoun County v. Brandon
Citation | 237 Ala. 537,187 So. 868 |
Decision Date | 06 April 1939 |
Docket Number | 3 Div. 292. |
Parties | CALHOUN COUNTY v. BRANDON ET AL. |
Court | Supreme Court of Alabama |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Montgomery County; Walter B. Jones Judge.
Petition of Calhoun County for mandamus to John Brandon, Charles E McCall, and Ben P. Singleton, as members of the State Board of Adjustment. From a judgment for defendants, petitioner appeals.
Reversed rendered and remanded.
Merrill & Merrill and R. E. Jones, all of Anniston, for appellant.
Files Crenshaw, Sp. Atty. for Board of Adjustment, of Montgomery, Thos. S. Lawson, Atty. Gen., and Silas C. Garrett, III, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellees.
The petition is for mandamus directed to John Brandon et als., as parties who constitute the State Board of Adjustment, to vacate an order declining to examine and allow a claim of Calhoun County, Alabama, for alleged wrongful payment of per diem and expenses of Assistant State Examiners Chandler and Edgar, in the examination of the accounts of Allen, as County Superintendent of Education, and Stanley, as Custodian of "School Funds."
The circuit court denied the mandamus, and the county appeals from that judgment.
The determination of this case requires a construction of the Act of March 1, 1937 (General Acts Alabama, Extra Session, 1936-1937, p. 205), under which the claim was filed. Said act reads, in part, as follows:
* * *." (Italics supplied.)
The Act of September 14, 1935 (Gen. Acts Ala.1935, p. 1164), to which the foregoing is an amendment, is similar to the Act of 1937, the latter Act being an amendment to Section 2 of the 1935 Act. Hence our constructions of the former act are important to this decision.
The earlier decisions touching this statute are collected in Turner et al. v. Lumbermens Mut. Ins. Co., 235 Ala. 632, 180 So. 300, and are not of the class of persons or claims as presented in this petition. It was there declared (1) that the act creating the State Board of Adjustment to hear claims against the State did not create a right but granted a privilege in the exact terms stated in the statute; (2) that the jurisdiction of the board was limited and so was its powers; (3) that this statute giving the jurisdiction and power to hear claims against the state must be strictly construed.
In State v. Tuscaloosa County et al., 233 Ala. 611, 172 So. 892, it was declared: "County held not required to reimburse state for expenses incurred in auditing accounts of county superintendent of education and county treasurer of school funds, since public school funds, as between county and state, are state funds and county, through its governing body, has no interest in nor control over such funds (Code 1923, §§ 181, 735, 736, subd. 2, 739, 741, 749; Gen.Acts 1933, Ex.Sess. p. 203, § 2; pp. 114, 128; School Code 1927 §§ 86, 94, 95, 138; Gen.Acts 1931, p. 604; Gen.Acts 1932, Ex.Sess. p. 38; Const.1901, §§ 256, 260, 262)." Under the last cited decision, the county was declared to be under no liability for payment of such fees and expenses of examiners touching such...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State ex rel. McQueen v. Brandon
... ... prohibition from doing an act although unauthorized, unless ... the said act is of a judicial nature. Washington County v ... [State ex rel.] Bowling, 151 Ala. 561, 44 So. 465; State v ... Bradley, 134 Ala. 549, 33 So. 339. * * *" ... The ... recent ... that finding. State v. Inman, 239 Ala. 348, 195 So ... 448; Dunn Const. Co. v. State Board, 234 Ala. 372, ... 175 So. 383; Calhoun County v. Brandon, 237 Ala ... 537, 187 So. 868; Ballenger Const. Co. v. State Board of ... Adjustment, 234 Ala. 377, 175 So. 387; Turner v ... ...
-
Norton v. Lusk
... ... equipment and assets had been previously delivered by ... Jefferson County, the owner, to the Medical College of the ... University of Alabama under a written contract of ... Hawkins v. State Board ... of Adjustment, 242 Ala. 547, 7 So.2d 775; Calhoun ... County v. Brandon, 237 Ala. 537, 187 So. 868; ... Ballenger Construction Co. v. State Board ... ...
-
Opinion of the Justices
... ... 448; Dunn ... Construction Co. v. State Board, 234 Ala. 372, 175 So ... 383; Calhoun County v. Brandon, 237 Ala. 537, 187 ... So. 868; Ballenger Construction Co. v. State Board of ... ...
-
Sexton v. State
...And, although a corporation may be included in statutes which refer to the rights of a "person" or "persons", Calhoun County v. Brandon, 237 Ala. 537, 187 So. 868 (1939), it has been held not to be an "association". In re Opinion of the Justices, 266 Ala. 363, 96 So.2d 634 (1957). There are......