State Ex Rel. Miera v. Field

• Decision Date: 06 May 1918
• Docket Number: No. 2119.,2119.
• Citation: 172 P. 1136,24 N.M. 168
• Parties: STATE ex rel. MIERAv.FIELD, County Treasurer.
• Court: New Mexico Supreme Court

24 N.M. 168

172 P. 1136

STATE ex rel. MIERA

v.FIELD, County Treasurer.

No. 2119.

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

May 6, 1918.

Syllabus by the Court.

Where, by law, the duty of performing certain work is cast upon a designated county official, for which compensation is provided by law, it is not competent for the board of county commissioners to employ other persons to do the work required of such county official and pay for such services. The duty of preparing the assessment roll rests upon the county assessor, and a contract made by the board of county commissioners with a private individual to do such work is ultra vires.

Appeal from District Court, Socorro County; Mechem, Judge.

Mandamus by the State, on the relation of Constancio Miera, against N. A. Field, Treasurer of Socorro County. Demurrer to petition sustained, and judgment entered for defendant, and relator appeals. Affirmed.

Where, by law, the duty of performing certain work is cast upon a designated county official, for which compensation is provided by law, it is not competent for the board of county commissioners to employ other persons to do the work required of such county official and pay for such services. The duty of preparing the assessment roll rests upon the county assessor, and a contract made by the board of county commissioners with a private individual to do such work is ultra vires.

E. Baca, of Socorro, and M. U. Vigil (M. J. McGuinness, of Santa Fé, of counsel), for appellant.

H. L. Patton, Atty. Gen., and H. P. Owen, Dist. Atty., of Los Lunas, for appellee.

ROBERTS, J.

Appellant, as relator, applied for a writ of mandamus against the appellee, as treasurer of Socorro county, to compel him to pay two warrants issued to and in favor of appellant by the board of county commissioners of said county. The petition for the writ alleged that relator had been employed by the board of county commissioners to complete the assessment books of Socorro county for the year 1916; that it was agreed between the board and relator that he should be paid the sum of $300 for the work; that after relator had completed the assessment books, and extended the taxes thereon, it was discovered that the state tax commission had, by mistake, included an erroneous levy by which it became necessary to correct the assessment rolls; that relator was employed to make the necessary corrections by the board, and it was agreed that he should be paid the sum of $300 therefor. He alleged the full performance of the contract on his part, the drawing of the warrant by the order of the board of county commissioners, and the refusal of the county treasurer to pay the same. The court sustained a demurrer to the petition, and judgment was entered for the appellee.

The case here turns on the single question as to the authority of the board of county commissioners to employ and pay for services which the law requires to be performed by a county official, and for the doing of which he receives a compensation fixed by law. The statute provides for the election of a county assessor, prescribes his duties, and fixes his salary. Chapter 54, Laws 1915, makes it the duty of the county assessor to prepare the assessment roll for his county, and he is required to correct such roll upon the order of the state tax commission.

Appellant argues that because, by virtue of the statute, the board of county commissioners has the care of the county property and the management of the interests of the county, and the...