Emberson v. Adams County

• Decision Date: 16 June 1913
• Docket Number: 17,311
• Parties: M. R. EMBERSON, APPELLANT, v. ADAMS COUNTY, APPELLANT; U. S. ROHRER, APPELLEE
• Court: Nebraska Supreme Court

142 N.W. 294

93 Neb. 823

M. R. EMBERSON, APPELLANT, v. ADAMS COUNTY, APPELLANT; U. S. ROHRER, APPELLEE

No. 17,311

Supreme Court of Nebraska

June 16, 1913

APPEAL from the district court for Adams county: HARRY S. DUNGAN JUDGE. Reversed with directions.

REVERSED.

John M Ragan, M. A. Hartigan and J. W. James, for appellant.

John Snider, contra.

BARNES J. ROSE, SEDGWICK and HAMER, JJ., not sitting.

OPINION

BARNES, J.

The plaintiff in this action was employed in the office of the county attorney of Adams county in the performance of clerical work which was necessary in order to enable the county attorney to properly perform the duties of his office. She presented a bill for her services to the county board amounting to $ 25 for the month of November, 1910. The bill was audited and allowed, and one U. S. Rohrer, as a taxpayer, appealed to the district court, where a trial resulted in a judgment for the appellant rejecting the plaintiff's claim, and she has brought the case here by appeal.

The question involved is the power of the county board to furnish and pay for clerical help in the county attorney's office. The district court found that the services were performed, and were necessary to enable the county attorney to properly perform his duties, but further found that the board had no power to pay for such services.

In Lancaster County v. Lincoln Auditorium Ass'n, 87 Neb. 87, 127 N.W. 226, it was said: "The direction of county affairs is entrusted by law to the county board, and not to the courts. Neither are infallible. It is probable that, where no sinister influences are shown to exist, county affairs may in the long run be best administered by the men chosen by the people for that express purpose. While the intervener and other citizens of the county may be possessed of business acumen which would prevent them making such a contract, we are of opinion that it is not void for want of consideration."

Berryman v. Schalander, 85 Neb. 281, 122 N.W. 990, was a case where the county attorney filed a claim for $ 21.84 for expenses necessarily incurred in performing the duties of his office. The district court held that plaintiff could not recover. On appeal to this court it was said: "Section 4440, Ann. St. 1907, in defining the powers of a county gives the county power 'to make all contracts and to do all other acts in relation to the property and concerns of the county necessary to the exercise of its corporate powers. ' In construing this provision of the statute and determining the meaning of the word 'necessary' therein, in Lancaster County v. Green, 54 Neb. 98, 74 N.W. 430, we held: '(1) A board of county commissioners, in addition to the powers specially conferred by statute, has such other powers as are incidentally necessary to enable such board to carry into effect the powers granted. (2) The word "necessary" considered, and, in respect to the implied powers of boards of county commissioners, held to mean no more than the exercise of such powers as are reasonably required by the exigencies of each case as it arises.' In the opinion (p. 103) we said: 'The county commissioners, therefore, are clothed not only with the powers expressly conferred upon them by statute, but they also possess such powers as are requisite to enable them to discharge the official duties devolved upon them by law. It was not practicable in advance to enumerate all the powers...