Clay

Ventura County v. Clay

Good Law
112 Cal. 65·1896 Cal. LEXIS 649·44 P. 488
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 24, 1896L. A. No. 71California1,967 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Vanclief, J.

Action to enjoin the treasurer of Ventura county from paying an auditor’s warrant in favor of the defendant Bradley for two hundred and forty dollars claimed to be due Bradley for his services in collecting license taxes under an alleged contract with that county, and allowed by the board of supervisors as a valid claim. This action was brought by the district attorney, who contended that the alleged contract of Bradley with the county, and the allowance of Bradley’s claim by the board of supervisors, were unauthorized by law; and, therefore, that this action was authorized by section 8 of the County Government Act.

The cause was tried by the court, whose findings and judgment were in favor of defendants; and plaintiff brings this appeal from the judgment on a bill of exceptions.

The material facts disclosed by the record are substantially as follows:

*67 On November 7, 1890, the board of supervisors passed an ordinance (No. 48) amending section 2 of a prior ordinance (No. 39) so as to make it read as follows:

This ordinance was duly attested, certified, and published, so that it took effect on November 30, 1890, and is admitted by both parties to be a valid ordinance, though…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.