M'Connell v. Wall

Decision Date04 February 1887
CitationM'Connell v. Wall, 3 S.W. 287 (Tex. 1887)
PartiesMcCONNELL <I>v.</I> WALL.
CourtTexas Supreme Court

Nunn & Denny, for appellant. Maxcy & Maxcy and W. B. Wall, for appellee.

STAYTON, J.

This action was brought by the appellant, as county treasurer of Houston county, against W. B. Wall, county judge of that county, to recover money which he alleged belonged to the county, and was by the defendant unlawfully detained. It appears that Houston county found it necessary to issue and sell bonds to raise money to erect a court-house and jail in place of like buildings destroyed by fire. The county sold $20,000 of bonds for this purpose, but the bonds were not delivered at the time some of the parties contracted for them, and the money was not paid until the bonds were delivered, though they were made to bear interest before the date of the delivery. The proceeds of all the bonds, except some amounting to some $2,500 were paid to the appellant before the institution of this suit. Bonds for $5,000 were sold to the Houston county bank, under an agreement between the bank and the commissioners' court that they should be paid for as the money was needed in the erection of the court-house and jail. These bonds were sold at par, and one-half of their proceeds was paid to the appellant before this suit was instituted, but the residue was afterwards paid.

The county commissioners' court has control of the financial affairs of a county, and, if it makes contracts through which money does not become due to it so soon as it ought, the county treasurer cannot...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
3 cases
  • Kootenai County v. Hope Lumber Co.
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • April 11, 1907
    ... ... 270, 3 P. 383; Cedar Co. v ... Sager, 90 Iowa 11, 57 N.W. 634; Board of ... Commissioners v. Young, 3 Wyo. 684, 29 P. 1002; McConnel ... v. Wall, 67 Tex. 323, 3 S.W. 287.) ... Payment ... of costs in this case by the county commissioners was not a ... compromise or settlement of ... ...
  • Chapman v. Tyler County
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • February 11, 1924
    ...any of the counties or incorporated cities, towns or villages shall be by or against it in its corporate name." See McConnell v. Wall, 67 Tex. 323, 3 S. W. 287; Smith v. Mosley, 74 Tex. 631, 12 S. W. Appellants' second proposition is as follows: "A petition to establish a claim as a general......
  • Chapman v. Eastland County
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • March 20, 1924
    ...being the owner of the funds, this suit is properly maintainable in its corporate name. Article 1835, Rev. Civ. Stat.; McConnell v. Wall, 67 Tex. 325, 3 S. W. 287. The sixth is that the county cannot maintain this suit for the school funds because appellant says such funds were funds belong......