Clay County v. Chickasaw County

Mississippi Supreme Court
Clay County v. Chickasaw County, 76 Miss. 418 (Miss. 1898)
Woods

Clay County v. Chickasaw County

Opinion of the Court

Woods, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

In the month of January, 1897, the claim here sued on was formally presented by the'attorney of the appellee to the board of supervisors of Clay county, and the facts supporting the claim were stated in his communication with particularity. The communication was referred, by an order entered upon the *421minutes of the board of supervisors of Clay county, to the at-. torney' of that board. The attorney of appellee was informed thereafter, by the said attorney of appellant, that he did not think Clay county liable for the claim, and that Chickasaw county would have to bring suit, and an action was thereupon instituted. After demurrer properly overruled to complainant’s amended bill, the appellant answered, and, on hearing, after evidence taken, a decree was entered in favor of complainant, and Clay county appeals.

We are of opinion that there was a sufficient presentment of the claim, and sufficient evidence of a refusal to allow the claim. While it is true that no order of refusal to allow the claim entered upon the minutes of thé board of supervisors of Clay county, it is true also that none was necessary. It is only in case of an allowance of a claim' that the statute requires an order to be entered upon the minutes. It is contended, also, by appellant’s counsel that the decree of this court in the case of Clay County v. Chickasaw County, 64 Miss., 544, was a final adjudication of all matters in controversy between the two counties. But this is not correct, for the claim, which is the foundation of the present suit, neither was nor could have been litigated in the former suit. The liability of Chickasaw county on the claims which gave rise to the present litigation was not established for more that ten years after the former suit had been finally determined, and until appellees’ liability on the disputed claims had been declared by the courts of the county, Chickasaw county had no'claim against Clay county for payment of the latter’s proportionate part of the disputed claims.

Reference

Cited By
4 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
1. Counties. Suits against. Demand. Refusal to pay. Entry on minutes. Code 1892, 1292. Insufficient présentation to and failure by the board of supervisors to disallow a claim is no defense to a suit against the county thereon, when the same was presented for payment, referred by the board to its attorney, and the attorney informed plaintiff he would have to sue. The statute, code 1892, § 292, requiring the presentation of claims for payment before suits ag'ainst a county, does not require the rejection of a claim to be recorded on the minutes of the board. 2. Res Adjudicata. Previous suit. Judgment. A judgment in a previous suit does not’support a plea of res adjudieata in a second suit between the same parties, if the claim propounded in the second was not, and could not have been, litigated in the first.