County of San Joaquin v. Jones
Cases that cite this one
3 later published cases cite this decision.
- Shumate v. Board of County Com'rs (Pitkin County District Court 1900)
- Lewis v. Colgan (Cal. 1897)
- County of Modoc v. Spencer (Cal. 1894)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Field, C. J. concurring.
The defendant retains a sum of money in his hands as County
The main and only question necessasy to be decided is, whether the board had the power to fix this salary.
The general law allows the Treasurer a percentage on the sums received by him as compensation for official services. This board having only special powers given by the Legislature, finist find some express authority to make this allowance a debt or charge upon the county finances. But so far from any such authority, it is provided (Wood’s Dig. 696) that the Board of Supervisors shall not, for any purpose, contract debts or liabilities except those fixed by or in pursuance of law. The Legislature itself fixed the compensation, which was designed, doubtless, to comprehend the full amount to be paid to the officer; and if the Board of Supervisors could, after this, increase -the compensation in favor of the Treasurer, so it could that of the Clerk and Sheriff, and, perhaps, many other officers. We think the doctrine would be dangerous in practice and not warranted in principle. Having fixed the compensation for these officers itself, it can scarcely be presumed the Legislature meant to give to the Supervisors the same power, and we see in the acts cited, no evidence of such purpose. Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.