Hendricks v. Chautauqua County Com'rs

Decision Date09 July 1886
Citation35 Kan. 483,11 P. 450
PartiesF. E. HENDRICKS v. THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF CHAUTAUQUA COUNTY
CourtKansas Supreme Court

Error from Chautauqua District Court.

ACTION brought by Hendricks against The County Board of Chautauqua County, to recover for medical services, etc. The defendant demurred to plaintiff's petition on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, which demurrer the court sustained at the March Term 1885, and rendered judgment for costs against plaintiff. He brings the case here. The opinion states the facts.

Judgment affirmed.

McBrian & Pile, for plaintiff in error.

Peckham & Henderson, for defendant in error.

JOHNSTON J. All the Justices concurring.

OPINION

JOHNSTON, J.:

F. E. Hendricks brought this action against the board of county commissioners of Chautauqua county, and in his petition alleged substantially that on November 25, 1883, the sheriff of Chautauqua county and his deputies arrested one Cyrenius B. Hendricks, and that while they had him in custody at a point fifteen miles from Sedan, where the county jail was located, he was shot, and so severely wounded that he could not be removed or taken to the county jail, and that his condition resulting from the wound was such that it was impossible for him to receive the treatment and attention in the county jail actually necessary to his recovery; that thereupon the sheriff and his deputies, with the knowledge and consent of the defendants, removed the wounded prisoner, who was then expected to live only a short time, to the residence of the plaintiff, which was about one-fourth of a mile from the place where the prisoner was shot, and that the sheriff then requested the plaintiff to give the prisoner such treatment, nursing and medicines as his condition required. It was alleged that the plaintiff, at the instance and request of the sheriff, took charge of and attended upon and nursed the prisoner from the 25th day of November, 1883, till the 25th day of February, 1884, during which time he furnished and provided fuel for the benefit of the prisoner and beyond what was necessary for the personal use of the plaintiff, of the value of $ 12, and that he expended for medicines and remedies for the prisoner the sum of $ 118.65, which it is alleged were necessary, and were prescribed by the attending physician; and that he attended and waited upon the prisoner for the period of ninety days, and that his services were necessary and reasonably worth $ 3 per day, and of the aggregate value of $ 270, after which time the sheriff again took charge of the prisoner and conveyed him to the county jail. He alleges that the articles furnished, money expended, and services rendered, were necessary for the recovery of the prisoner, and were furnished, expended and rendered at the request of the sheriff, and with the knowledge, consent and approval of the defendants; that in 1884 Cyrenius B. Hendricks was convicted of murder in the first degree, and sentenced to suffer death, and that he is now in the penitentiary awaiting the execution of that sentence; that Cyrenius B. Hendricks has no estate, property or means of any kind to pay the plaintiff's claim, and that he will lose the same unless it is paid by Chautauqua county; that on the 5th day of January, 1885, the plaintiff duly presented his claim to the county commissioners for allowance, which was rejected, and he avers that it is now due and unpaid. The defendant board demurred to the petition upon the ground that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against it. The demurrer was sustained by the court, and the plaintiff is prosecuting this petition in error to reverse that ruling.

The facts stated in the petition fail to show a liability of the county of Chautauqua in favor of the plaintiff. The statute provides that jails shall be established and kept in every county, at the expense of the county, for the safe-keeping of the prisoners lawfully committed. The sheriff of the county is required to keep the jail, and is responsible for the manner in which it is kept, and he is required to supply the prisoners with proper food and drink at the expense of the county. (Comp. Laws of 1879, ch....

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Univ. of Kan. Hosp. Auth. v. Bd. of Comm'rs of the Cnty. of Wabaunsee
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • June 27, 2014
    ...county board to pay the physician. Roberts v. County of Pottawatomie, 10 Kan. *29, *32 (1872); see also Hendricks v. Comm'rs of Chautauqua Co., 35 Kan. 483, 486–87, 11 P. 450 (1886) (duty of keeping county jail and supplying prisoners with board and lodging devolves upon the sheriff; county......
  • Wesley Medical Center v. City of Wichita, 57546
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • July 26, 1985
    ... ... The CITY OF WICHITA, Kansas, Defendant-Appellant, ... the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Sedgwick, ... Defendants/Appellees, ... Hendricks ... v. Comm'rs of Chautauqua Co., 35 Kan. 483, 11 Pac. 450 (1886); ... ...
  • Mombert v. Bannock County
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • January 19, 1904
    ... ... statutes to those of Idaho by the supreme court of Kansas ... (Hendricks v. Board of County Commissioners of Chautauqua ... Co., 35 Kan. 483, 11 P. 450.) Plaintiff cannot ... ...
  • Hamilton County v. Myers
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • March 28, 1888
    ...the authority, of persons other than designated officers, to create indebtedness. Roberts v. Pottawatomie Co., 10 Kan. 29. Hendricks v. Commissioners, 35 Kan. 483. Moon v. Howard County, 97 Ind. 176. Mansfield Sac Co., 59 Iowa 694, 13 N.W. 762. The judgment of the district court is reversed......
  • 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