Larmore v. State

Decision Date04 February 1942
Docket Number6-10.
Citation24 A.2d 284,180 Md. 347
PartiesLARMORE v. STATE, and four other cases.
CourtMaryland Court of Appeals

Appeals from Circuit Court, Wicomico County; Benj. A. Johnson, T Sangston Insley, and James M. Crockett, Judges.

Ernest M. Larmore, George E. Wright, Charles R. Parker, James S Adkins, and H. Lay Phillips were convicted of misfeasance in office as county commissioners in approving and passing for payment fictitious and fraudulent claims made up by a dishonest clerk, and they appeal.

Affirmed.

Frederick W. C. Webb and Levin C. Bailey, both of Salisbury (William W. Travers and Victor H. Laws, Jr., both of Salisbury, on the brief), for appellants.

Robert E. Clapp, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen. (William C. Walsh, Atty. Gen., and Rex A. Taylor, State's Atty., of Salisbury, on the brief), for appellee.

Before BOND, C.J., and SLOAN, DELAPLAINE, COLLINS, FORSYTHE, and MARBURY, JJ.

BOND Chief Judge.

The appellants, formerly constituting the County Commissioners of Wicomico County, were jointly indicted and convicted of the common law crime of misfeasance in office, in approving and passing for payment fictitious and fraudulent claims made up by a dishonest clerk. Mechem, Public Offices and Officers, sec. 1022; 2 Wharton, Criminal Law, 12 Ed., sec. 1910. They now on their appeal urge the existence of error in the overruling of their demurrer to two counts of the indictment, a second and a seventh, and in the exclusion of evidence offered by them to prove diligence in the manner of executing their duties, and in their reliance upon their clerk.

The duties of the office are prescribed in the Code, Article 25. By section 1 the Commissioners are given charge and control of the county property, by section 9 they are directed to assess and collect taxes for county expenses, 'and pay and discharge all claims on or against the county which have been expressly or impliedly authorized by law'; and by section 10 it is provided that 'they shall allow no claim against the county not properly chargeable to the same and for which the claimant shall not produce a legal voucher.' By a section 207 of Article 23 of the Code P.L.L. of the county, money duly deposited is to be drawn only upon check of the President of the Commissioners, countersigned by the Treasurer of the county, 'in payment of debts and accounts due by Wicomico County, duly approved and passed by said County Commissioners and by them ordered to be paid.'

There was evidence tending to prove that in the year 1940 two fraudulent and fictitious vouchers, for $228 and $135, respectively, among others, were issued and paid upon presentation by the clerk to the Commissioners, and signatures forged by her, when there was no indebtedness for the amounts and no authorization or warrant by the Commissioners. The clerk, in the course of a career of theft covering some years, followed a practice of taking checks from the Treasurer's office, without authority, having them signed by the President of the Board upon her assurances of indebtedness, then having the Treasurer countersign, and with the countersignature affixed returning to the office of the Commissioners, forging the names of payees, and cashing the checks and appropriating the money to her own use. Spurious bills were sometimes presented to the Commissioners, and sometimes it was represented that the bills were too voluminous for presentation.

This clerk had first been appointed by a previous Board of Commissioners, under the authority of the Acts of 1927, chapter 226, and Acts of 1937, chapter 207, Wicomico County P.L.L. Art. 23, sec. 202, which defined the clerk's duties and required that he should give bond in the penalty of $10,000 for the faithful performance of them. After a general direction that the clerk shall perform all duties required by law, or by order of the Commissioners, it is specified that he shall keep minutes of the Board's actions, preserve papers presented to it and acted upon, keep books of the county properties and moneys, and of appropriations made by the Board, keep a warrant book of the county, and make out every warrant authorizing payment of moneys, to be executed by the President of the Board and by the clerk, and keep entries showing the contents of the warrants. The duties specified do not to any extent include those previously imposed on the members of the Board themselves; they are clerical duties, or duties of an assistant. The Commissioners remain charged with the management of the county's finances as specified.

The charge in the counts of the indictment considered on the demurrer was that the Commissioners 'unlawfully...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Board of Educ. of Prince George's County v. Prince George's County Educators' Ass'n, Inc.
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • 1 Septiembre 1985
    ...v. Anderson, 281 Md. 496, 508-509, 380 A.2d 1032 (1977); Coddington v. Helbig, 195 Md. 330, 336, 73 A.2d 454 (1950); Larmore v. State, 180 Md. 347, 352, 24 A.2d 284 (1942). Finally, the General Assembly has made it clear that a county board of education, and no other entity, is the employer......
  • State v. Wheatley
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • 13 Enero 1949
    ...to encounter. State v. Kern, 51 N.J.L. 259, 17 A. 114; Clark and Marshall, Law of Crimes, 4th Ed., sec. 436(f). Thus, in Larmore v. State, 180 Md. 347, 24 A.2d 284, this Court held that an indictment charging that commissioners negligently and unlawfully approved and passed for payment a fi......

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