State v. Linville
| Decision Date | 18 May 1928 |
| Docket Number | No. 27883.,27883. |
| Parties | STATE ex rel. BRUNJES v. LINVILLE, Presiding Judge, et al. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Original proceeding in mandamus by the State, at the relation of Richard D. Brunjes, against John T. Linville, Presiding Judge, and two others, Associate Judges of the County Court of Benton County. Alternative writ quashed, and proceeding dismissed without prejudice.
Richard D. Brunjes, of Warsaw, pro se.
F. M. Brady, of Warsaw, for respondents.
This is an original proceeding in mandamus. It appears from the alternative writ and the petition of relator annexed thereto, and to which it makes reference, that relator during the years 1921, 1922, 1923, and 1924 was the duly elected, qualified, and acting prosecuting attorney of Benton county; that the salary incident to such office, as provided by law, was $1,800 per annum payable in monthly installments of $150 each; that the county court of said county duly issued warrants to relator in payment of such salary as it accrued up to and including December 1, 1922; that thereafter said court refused to issue to relator any warrants for salary; and that there is now due and owing to relator $3,750, salary for the month of December, 1922, and for the years 1923 and 1924, with interest on the several installments thereof from the respective dates upon which they were payable, amounting in the aggregate to $657.
Respondents in their return to the writ averred that the county court of Benton county never at any time refused to issue to relator warrants for his salary; that on or about January 1, 1923, relator said to the judges of said court that there was such confusion and uncertainty as to the applicable law governing the salaries of prosecuting attorneys they should withhold his warrants until the matter was finally settled by the Supreme Court; that the county court was at all times during the years 1923 and 1924, from month to month, able, ready, and willing to pay to relator or his assignee such sums as were due him on account of relator's salary; that on May 14, 1925, relator in writing assigned to the Farmers' Bank of Cole Camp all salary due him as prosecuting attorney of Benton county from December 1, 1922, to January 1, 1925, inclusive; that thereafter, on June 1, 1925, the county court caused to be drawn in favor of the Farmers' Bank of Cole Camp, as assignee of relator, a county warrant for the sum of $3,750, which was duly paid; and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Kelley v. Mitchell
...of writ; appropriate remedy for challenging denial of license to practice medicine was writ of certiorari); State ex rel. Brunjes v. Linville, Mo., 8 S.W.2d 623, 623-24 (1928) (affirming denial of peremptory writ; appropriate remedy for prosecuting attorney to recover backpay was suit on em......
-
State ex rel. Nichols v. Killoren
...State ex rel. Clark v. West, 272 Mo. 304, 198 S.W. 1111; State ex rel. Chase v. Hiers, 240 Mo.App. 99, 217 S.W.2d 577; State ex rel. Brunjes v. Linville, Mo., 8 S.W.2d 623. We are of the opinion that our alternative writ of mandamus heretofore issued should be quashed. It is so ANDERSON, P.......
- State ex rel. Brunjes v. Linville
-
State ex rel. J.C. Nichols Co. v. Boley, 75317
...the want of a legal remedy.' " State ex rel. Kelley v. Mitchell, 595 S.W.2d 261, 266-67 (Mo. banc 1980), quoting State ex rel. Brunjes v. Linville, 8 S.W.2d 623 (Mo.1928). Here it is undisputed that relators have an adequate remedy in the procedure for administrative review, as provided und......