Merriam

Merriam v. Barnum

Good Law
116 Cal. 619·1897 Cal. LEXIS 598·48 P. 727
Supreme Court of CaliforniaApril 29, 1897Sac. No. 190California1,453 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Henshaw, J.

The application is for a writ of mandate. A demurrer was interposed to the petition, which was sustained by the court, with leave to plaintiff to amend. Plaintiff declined to amend, and prosecutes this appeal from the judgment of the court entered against him. His petition discloses the following facts: He is an attorney at law, and the defendant Barnum was and is the auditor of the county of Fresno, state of *621 California. On the twenty-ninth day of July, 1895, the courthouse of the county of Fresno was partially destroyed by fire. On July 31, 1895, the supervisors of the county of Fresno, at a special session called forth at purpose, unanimously adopted a resolution or order, of which the following is a copy:

Plaintiff served during the month of August as such special counsel in settling with insurance companies for losses sustained by fire, and in matters pertaining to the reconstruction of the courthouse. He performed all the conditions of his contract, and thereafter presented in due form for allowance his bill for services, which was allowed by the board of supervisors, and ordered paid. Plaintiff demanded of the auditor a warrant on the treasury for the amount of the…

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.