Watson v. Union County

• Decision Date: 08 February 1937
• Docket Number: No. 4-4523.,4-4523.
• Citation: 101 S.W.2d 791
• Parties: WATSON et al. v. UNION COUNTY.
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

101 S.W.2d 791

WATSON et al. v. UNION COUNTY.

No. 4-4523.

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

February 8, 1937.

Rehearing Denied March 8, 1937.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Union County, Second Division; Gus W. Jones, Judge.

Action by Myrtle Watson and another against Union County. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiffs appeal.

Affirmed in part; reversed and remanded in part.

Coulter & Coulter, of El Dorado, for appellants.

Alvin D. Stevens, of El Dorado, for appellee.

McHANEY, Justice.

The agreed statement of facts in this case shows that the quorum court of Union County properly and regularly appropriated the sum of $1,800 to pay the salary of a home demonstration agent for the county for the year 1933, at the rate of $150 per month; that appellant Myrtle Watson was employed by the county judge under a verbal contract (no order being made by the county court with reference thereto) to act as such agent for the year 1933 at said monthly salary; that she entered upon her duties and performed same for the whole year, acting under said agreement; that she was paid the sum of $900; and that the sum of $900 is still due her, if the contract is valid and binding. It is further agreed that the county had sufficient funds at the close of said year in its general fund to more than pay said claim.

It is further stipulated that at the same time the quorum court appropriated $1,800 to pay the salary of a farm demonstration agent for the county for the year 1933, at the rate of $150 per month; that appellant Lynn Smith was employed by the county judge under a verbal contract (the county court not having made any order with reference thereto) to act as such agent; that he entered upon his duties, worked for a time and resigned, leaving the county owing him for two months' pay. It is further stipulated that the county judge, if present, would testify that about April, 1933, he advised both appellants that he could not tell whether there would be sufficient funds to pay salaries to the end of the year 1933; that if there were sufficient funds, salaries would be paid in accordance with the agreement, but if not sufficient, they would not be paid; and that shortly thereafter, appellant Smith resigned. Claims were filed in the county court based on the above facts and the court disallowed both claims. An appeal was prosecuted to the circuit court, where the claims were again disallowed, and the case is here on appeal.

Section 1983, Crawford & Moses' Digest, as amended by Act 347 of the Acts of 1927, p. 1104, reads as follows: "The quorum courts of the respective counties of this State are hereby authorized and empowered to appropriate annually such amount as may be deemed necessary to be used in cooperation with the Extension Service of the College of Agriculture of the University of Arkansas, and the United States Department of Agriculture, cooperating, to aid said Departments in carrying on Cooperative Extension work in agriculture and home economics in such county. The county judges shall approve authorized claims against the county for such purposes, and such approved claims shall be paid by the County Treasurer. However, no claims shall be allowed in excess of the sum appropriated."

It is conceded that no order was entered on the county records employing either of appellants and that the county court, as such, took no action in the matter of making the contracts in the first instance. It is stipulated that the contracts were verbal and with the county judge and not the county court. By section 28, article 7, of our Constitution, county courts "have exclusive original jurisdiction in all matters relating to county taxes, * * * the disbursement of money for county purposes, and in every other case that may be necessary to the internal improvement and local concerns of the respective counties." Section 2279, Crawford & Moses' Digest, provides: "The county court of each county shall have the...