Common School District No. 27 v. Twin Falls National Bank, 5678

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Idaho
Writing for the CourtGIVENS, J.
Citation299 P. 662,50 Idaho 668
Docket Number5678
Decision Date19 May 1931
PartiesCOMMON SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 27, IN THE COUNTY OF TWIN FALLS, STATE OF IDAHO, Respondent, v. TWIN FALLS NATIONAL BANK, a Corporation, Appellant

299 P. 662

50 Idaho 668

COMMON SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 27, IN THE COUNTY OF TWIN FALLS, STATE OF IDAHO, Respondent,
v.

TWIN FALLS NATIONAL BANK, a Corporation, Appellant

No. 5678

Supreme Court of Idaho

May 19, 1931


SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS-WARRANTS, ISSUANCE OF-EVIDENCE.

1. Allegations of school district suing bank for conversion of money, held to state cause of action (C. S., sec. 911).

2. Uncertainty as to allegations concerning warrant issued by county auditor without order, held immaterial as to school district's action against bank for conversion of money received on such warrant (C. S., sec. 911).

[50 Idaho 669]

3. Order by school district is prerequisite to issuance of warrant on county treasurer against school district's funds (C. S., secs. 911, 913, 914).

4. Book containing carbon copy of each order issued by school district to county auditor for warrant on school fund, held admissible to prove nonissuance of order (C. S., sec. 911).

5. Evidence held to make prima facie showing that school district had not issued order to county auditor for warrant against school district's funds (C. S., sec. 911).

6. No presumption existed that county auditor had returned order, directing him to issue warrant against school funds, to school district, where auditor had not testified that he received order from district (C. S., secs. 911, 914).

7. No presumption existed that county auditor returned order, directing him to issue warrant, to school district, where district's witnesses had not been asked for order (C. S., secs. 911, 914).

8. Presumption may not be based on another presumption.

APPEAL from the District Court of the Eleventh Judicial District, for Twin Falls County. Hon. Wm. A. Babcock, Judge.

Action for conversion. Judgment for plaintiff. Affirmed.

Judgment affirmed. Costs to respondent.

James R. Bothwell and W. Orr Chapman, for Appellant.

Allegations that an instrument is "illegal," "unauthorized," "void," "unlawful," "not in the manner prescribed by law," "in violation of law," are mere conclusions, and a complaint to be sufficient must state of allege the ultimate facts. (Olles v. Orr, 6 Idaho 474, 56 P. 162; Wadsworth v. Erwin, 201 N.Y.S. 311; Lipson v. Evans, 133 Md. 370, 105 A. 312; Burlingame v. Traeger, 101 Cal.App. 365, 281 P. 1051; Beezley v. City of Astoria, 126 Ore. 177, 269 P. 216, 60 A. L. R. 504; Beckett v. Morse, 4 Cal.App. 228, 87 P. 408; Comstock v. Larimer & Weld Res. Co., 58 Colo. 186, Ann. Cas. 1916A, 416, 145 P. 700; Commonwealth v. McCormack, 177 Ky. 474, 197 S.W. 977.)

The best evidence of which the case is susceptible must be produced or introduced. (Fisher & Ball v. Carter, 178 Iowa 636, 160 N.W. 15; Pandaleon v. Brecker, 227 Mich. 297, 198 N.W. 953; School District No. 7, Rogers County, v. Eaton, 97 Okla. 177, 223 P. 857; Ft. Lyon Canal Co. v. Bennett, 61 Colo. 111, 156 P. 604; Lauderback v. Multnomah County, 111 Ore. 681, 226 P. 697.)

Sweeley & Sweeley, for Respondent.

Powers granted to public officers can be exercised only in the manner and under the circumstances prescribed by law. Any attempted exercise in any other way is a nullity. (Ex parte Farrell, 36 Mont. 254, 92 P. 785; Bingham County v. Bank, 122 F. 16, 58 C. C. A. 332.)

Records of a corporation are the best evidence of its acts, and so of whether it has acted at all. (Just v. Idaho Canal & Imp. Co., 16 Idaho 639, 133 Am. St. 140, 102 P. 381; Corcoran v. Sonora Min. & Mill. Co., 8 Idaho 651, 71 P. 127.)

GIVENS, J. Budge, Varian and McNaughton, JJ., and Sutphen, D. J., concur.

OPINION

[50 Idaho 670] GIVENS, J.

Respondent school district sued in conversion to recover from appellant bank $ 205 paid the bank by the treasurer of Twin Falls county, as treasurer of the district, on a warrant issued by the auditor of the county to the bank, alleging that no order for the warrant, as required by C. S., sec. 911, had ever been issued by the district, and that there was no valid debt supporting the warrant.

The bank denied the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 practice notes
  • Splinter v. City of Nampa, No. 7828
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • April 1, 1953
    ...Ins. Co., 35 Idaho 109, 206 P. 190; Johnson v. Richards, 50 Idaho 150, 294 P. 507; Common School Dist. No. 27 v. Twin Falls Nat. Bank, 50 Idaho 668, 299 P. 662; Wells v. Robinson Construction Co., 52 Idaho 562, 16 P.2d 1059; cf. anno. 95 A.L.R., subdiv. III, pp. The underlying principle app......
  • Hull v. Cartin, 6706
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • July 27, 1940
    ...having been proven. ( American Surety Co. v. Blake, 54 Idaho 1, 27 P.2d 972, 91 A. L. R. 153; Common School Dist. v. Twin Falls Nat. Bank, 50 Idaho 668, 299 P. 662; Wright v. Chicago [105 P.2d 206] B. & Q. Ry. Co., 118 Mo.App. 392, 94 S.W. 555; International Harvester Co. v. Elfstrom, 101 M......
  • Common School District No. 18 v. Twin Falls Bank and Trust Co., 5860
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • June 24, 1932
    ...heretofore been established in two companion cases recently decided by this court. (Common School Dist. No. 27 v. Twin Falls Nat. Bank, 50 Idaho 668, 299 P. 662; Common School Dist. No. 61 v. Twin Falls Bank & Trust Co., 50 Idaho 711, 4 P.2d 342.) The conversion occurred on the nineteenth d......
  • Wells v. Robinson Construction Company, 5898
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • December 10, 1932
    ...109, 131, 206 P. 190 (on rehearing); Johnson v. Richards, 50 Idaho 150, 163, 294 P. 507; School District No. 27 v. Twin Falls Nat. Bank, 50 Idaho 668, 673, 299 P. 662; State v. Cox, 298 Mo. 427, 250 S.W. 551.) [16 P.2d 1062] Respondent argues that the court would judicially notice the fact ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 cases
  • Splinter v. City of Nampa, No. 7828
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • April 1, 1953
    ...Ins. Co., 35 Idaho 109, 206 P. 190; Johnson v. Richards, 50 Idaho 150, 294 P. 507; Common School Dist. No. 27 v. Twin Falls Nat. Bank, 50 Idaho 668, 299 P. 662; Wells v. Robinson Construction Co., 52 Idaho 562, 16 P.2d 1059; cf. anno. 95 A.L.R., subdiv. III, pp. The underlying principle app......
  • Hull v. Cartin, 6706
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • July 27, 1940
    ...having been proven. ( American Surety Co. v. Blake, 54 Idaho 1, 27 P.2d 972, 91 A. L. R. 153; Common School Dist. v. Twin Falls Nat. Bank, 50 Idaho 668, 299 P. 662; Wright v. Chicago [105 P.2d 206] B. & Q. Ry. Co., 118 Mo.App. 392, 94 S.W. 555; International Harvester Co. v. Elfstrom, 101 M......
  • Common School District No. 18 v. Twin Falls Bank and Trust Co., 5860
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • June 24, 1932
    ...heretofore been established in two companion cases recently decided by this court. (Common School Dist. No. 27 v. Twin Falls Nat. Bank, 50 Idaho 668, 299 P. 662; Common School Dist. No. 61 v. Twin Falls Bank & Trust Co., 50 Idaho 711, 4 P.2d 342.) The conversion occurred on the nineteenth d......
  • Wells v. Robinson Construction Company, 5898
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • December 10, 1932
    ...109, 131, 206 P. 190 (on rehearing); Johnson v. Richards, 50 Idaho 150, 163, 294 P. 507; School District No. 27 v. Twin Falls Nat. Bank, 50 Idaho 668, 673, 299 P. 662; State v. Cox, 298 Mo. 427, 250 S.W. 551.) [16 P.2d 1062] Respondent argues that the court would judicially notice the fact ......
  • 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