State ex rel. Tilley v. Slover

• Decision Date: 28 November 1892
• Docket Number: No. 6,106.,6,106.
• Citation: 113 Mo. 211,20 S.W. 790
• Parties: STATE ex rel. TILLEY v. SLOVER, Judge.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

20 S.W. 790

113 Mo. 211

STATE ex rel. TILLEY v. SLOVER, Judge.

No. 6,106.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 1.

November 28, 1892.

OFFICIAL STENOGRAPHER — MISCONDUCT — COMPENSATION.

Where an official stenographer is removed by the judge for failure to attend personally to the duties of his office, he is not entitled to compensation for the time between the preferring of charges against him and the entry of the order of removal based on such charges, where, during such time, he did not attend court, or offer to do so, except by deputy.

Original proceeding in mandamus, brought by the state on the relation of Thomas J. Tilley against James H. Slover, judge of the circuit court, to compel the respondent to certify the relator's account for services rendered as official stenographer. Writ denied.

Huston & Parrish, Pratt, Ferry & Hagerman, and Edwards & Davison, for relator. Karnes, Holmes & Krauthoff, for respondent.

BRACE, J.

This is an original proceeding in mandamus to compel the respondent, judge of the second division of the circuit court of Jackson county, to certify relator's account for services rendered as official stenographer of said court from May 4 to May 16, 1891, inclusive of both these dates. In the opinion just handed down in 6,107, (20 S. W. Rep. 788,) we held that the relator was properly removed by the respondent from his said office on the 11th of May on charges against relator entered upon the records of said court on the 4th day of May, 1891, and, the petition and alternative writ having been amended by striking therefrom relator's claim for services from the 11th to 16th of May inclusive, the only question remaining to determine in this case is whether the relator is entitled to pay as official stenographer of said court from May 4th to May 10th, inclusive, i. e., for the time between the preferring of the charges and the removal. The law provides that the official stenographer "shall receive as per diem compensation the sum of ten dollars for each and every day in attendance upon the court for which he is appointed, and the amount so allowed shall be certified to by the judge thereof." Acts 1883, p. 59, Rev. St. 1889, § 8235. The respondent, in his return, states the reason for his refusal to certify the relator's account for these services was because the relator was not in attendance upon said division of the circuit court, and did not perform the services of official stenographer of said court, on the days claimed...