Walker v. Board of Com'rs of Grant County
| Decision Date | 01 December 1914 |
| Docket Number | 3911. |
| Citation | 144 P. 793,44 Okla. 350,1914 OK 603 |
| Parties | WALKER v. BOARD OF COM'RS OF GRANT COUNTY. |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
Where the only questions presented by a record are to be determined from the pleadings and journal entry of judgment, and where the purported pleadings and journal entry contained in such record bear no copy of filing marks or other evidence that the originals were ever filed in the trial court, such records present nothing to this court for decision and the appeal will be dismissed.
Commissioners' Opinion, Division No. 2. Error from District Court, Grant County; Wm. M. Boles, Judge.
Action by the Board of County Commissioners of Grant County against George D. Walker. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. Dismissed.
F. G Walling, of Tulsa, and J. B. Drennan, of Medford, for plaintiff in error.
Emery H. Breeden, of Medford, for defendant in error.
This was an action by Grant county, through its board of county commissioners and county attorney, to recover certain fees it was alleged had been paid without authority of law to George D. Walker, as sheriff. Defendant answered, denying the allegation in plaintiff's petition, and alleging that the fees in question were proper charges against the county and were lawfully paid, and further alleging that all the items and sums referred to in plaintiff's petition had been included in the sheriff's regular quarterly reports and accounts; that such quarterly reports had been duly filed with, and audited by the county clerk and duly approved and allowed by the board of county commissioners in regular session; and that, no appeal having been taken from the order of the board, the county was estopped from maintaining this action. The cause was tried by the court upon an agreed statement of facts, and upon the pleadings and agreed statement of facts the court gave judgment against defendant George D. Walker, and his bondsmen for the sum of $536.22 and costs. From this judgment the defendant, George D. Walker appeals upon the following specifications of error, to wit First, said court erred in overruling the demurrer to the petition; second, said court erred in sustaining the demurrer of the plaintiff to the answer of defendant; third, said court erred in rendering judgment in said action against said defendant and in favor of said plaintiff. No briefs were filed in this case, but by order of the court the parties were permitted to substitute the briefs in cause No. 3895, E. P. Privett et al. v. Board of County Commissioners, 145 P. 323, and the briefs in No. 3909, J. D. Orendorff et al. v. Board of County Commissioners, 144 P. 383, as the briefs in this cause. While it is alleged in the petition in error that the court erred in overruling defendant's demurrer to the petition, and erred in sustaining plaintiff's demurrer to a portion of defendant's answer, and while similar questions were presented and argued in the briefs in No. 3895 and No. 3909, because of similar actions of the court in those cases, yet the arguments made and authorities cited in such briefs are not applicable to the questions presented here for the reason that those suits were against different county officers, No. 3895 being against the register of deeds of Grant county, and No. 3909 being against one of the members of the board of county commissioners for the recovery of fees the payment of which is governed by different statutes in each case, and in both cases different to the statutes governing the fees to be paid to a sheriff. That is, cause No. 3895 is governed by the statutes...
To continue reading
Request your trial