Carlisle

Carlisle v. Tulare County

Good Law
1897 Cal. LEXIS 968·5 Cal. Unrep. 701·49 P. 3
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMay 29, 1897Sac. No. 218California1,992 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Searls, J.

Action by W. J. Carlisle to recover from the county of Tulare $518.35 as fees in criminal cases earned by plaintiff as city marshal of the city of Tulare. A demurrer was interposed to the complaint, which was overruled by the court, and defendant declining to answer, judgment went for plaintiff.' Defendant appeals.

There are some six causes of action set out in the complaint. Waiving these separate statements, we may epitomize the complaint, and present the salient points, thus: The city of Tulare is, and at all the times herein mentioned was, a city of the fifth class, organized and existing under and pursuant to an “Act to provide for the organization, incorporation and government of municipal corporations,” approved March 13, 1883, and is within the county of Tulare. The plaintiff was and is the duly elected, qualified and acting city marshal of said city of Tulare. As such city marshal, plaintiff rendered services in serving legal process, the fees for which amounted to $518.35. Of this sum, $276.40 was for service of process issuing out of justice’s-court for Tulare township, wherein the fees allowed constables for like services would amount to a like sum, and $241.95…

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.