State ex rel. Bd. of Com'rs of Monroe County v. Jackson

• Decision Date: 23 January 1913
• Docket Number: No. 7,758.,7,758.
• Citation: 100 N.E. 479,52 Ind.App. 254
• Parties: STATE ex rel. BOARD OF COM'RS OF MONROE COUNTY v. JACKSON et al.
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court

52 Ind.App. 254

100 N.E. 479

STATE ex rel. BOARD OF COM'RS OF MONROE COUNTY

v.JACKSON et al.

No. 7,758.

Appellate Court of Indiana, Division No. 1.

Jan. 23, 1913.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Monroe County; Rufus H. East, Special Judge.

Action by the State on relation of the Board of Commissioners of Monroe County against James W. Jackson and others. From a judgment in favor of certain defedants, the Board of Commissioners appeal. Affirmed.R. L. Morgan, of Bloomington, for appellant. Miers & Corr, Ira C. Batman, Robert G. Miller, and James W. Blair, all of Bloomington, for appellees.

FELT, P. J.

The appellant brought this suit against James W. Jackson and his sureties on an official bond to recover fees alleged to have been collected and unlawfully converted to the use of said Jackson while serving as recorder of Monroe county, Ind. Jackson, the principal, was defaulted, and, from a judgment in favor of appellees Duncan and Farr, this appeal is prosecuted. Appellees answered the complaint by general denial, the five years' statute of limitations, and a plea of res judicata. Appellant replied to the special answers by general denial and by a special paragraph which sought to avoid the statute of limitations by averring that appellees had concealed the cause of action against them. Upon request the court made a special finding of facts and stated its conclusions of law thereon, to which appellant duly excepted.

Appellant has assigned several errors, but those properly assigned raise the same question as that presented by the assignment, that the court erred in its second conclusion of law, and appellant in its brief states that “the question involved in this appeal is whether or not the operation of the statute of limitation has defeated the appellant's right to recover against the appellees Duncan and Farr, the sureties on appellee Jackson's official bond.”

[1] Furthermore, appellant has only discussed the questions raised by the exception to the conclusions of law and only cited authorities in support of the questions so presented. Other questions, if any, are therefore waived. Indianapolis & Cin. Traction Co. v. Arlington Telephone Co., 47 Ind. App. 657-659, 95 N. E. 280;Hoover v. Weesner, 147 Ind. 510, 45 N. E. 650, 46 N. E. 905;Franklin v. Lee, 30 Ind. App. 31-34, 62 N. E. 78.

The facts found show, in substance, that James W. Jackson was elected and served a term as recorder of Monroe county, Ind., ending November 18, 1898; that during said term he taxed and collected fees and costs of said office in the sum of $1,992.10, which he wrongfully failed to pay the treasurer of said county and converted to his own use; that in June, 1901, the board of commissioners of said county caused a suit to be commenced against said Jackson and appellees to recover the amount due as aforesaid; that appellees on the 16th day of June, 1902, filed answers to the complaint in said cause, to which appellant filed demurrers; that said cause was continued in said court, said demurrers were not ruled upon, and on April 20, 1903, the case was dismissed at the costs of the defendants and judgment rendered therefor in appellant's favor; that, prior to the dismissal of said cause, the board of commissioners of said county, by agreement of the members thereof and the defendants in said suit, made and entered of record an order showing that, “the above cause of action having been compromised and settled, the board of commissioners find that the same ought to be dismissed,” and thereupon ordered the county attorney to have the proper entry of dismissal entered in the Monroe circuit court; that no part of the indebtedness for which said suit was brought was at any time paid the treasurer of said county by any person; that in August, 1908, the board of commissioners of said county ordered an investigation of the records of the recorder's office of said county and employed expert accountants, who made an investigation thereof, and on December 12, 1908, reported to said board that said Jackson owed the county for fees collected and retained by him in the sum of $1,992.10; that said board on December 17, 1908, made demand therefor, payment was refused, and this suit was begun on the 23d of December following said demand; that the individual members of the board of commissioners,...