Board of County Commissioners v. Ferguson

151 P.2d 694, 159 Kan. 80
CourtSupreme Court of Kansas
DecidedSeptember 30, 1944
DocketNo. 36,233
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 151 P.2d 694 (Board of County Commissioners v. Ferguson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Board of County Commissioners v. Ferguson, 151 P.2d 694, 159 Kan. 80 (kan 1944).

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Hoch, J.:

This is an original proceeding in mandamus. The county commissioners of Wyandotte county seek a writ directing the county treasurer to deposit in the general fund of the county, credited to an “automobile fee fund,” the fees which he collects under G. S. 1943 Supp., 8-145 — such section being a part of the statutes relating to the registration of motor vehicles (G. S. 1943 Supp., 8-126 to 8-153) — and to subject to the board’s supervision and control all expenditures made in administering the statute. The county treasurer answers that such fees are properly deposited, currently, in a special fund not a part of the general fund of the county, and that he alone is responsible for administrative expenditures. The issue turns upon construction of the statute.

In view of the public nature of the controversy and the desirability of an early decision the question was given prompt consideration following oral arguments at the July session. Soon thereafter decision was announced, the writ being denied, with a statement that formal opinion would be handed down later.

The material facts are not in dispute. Prior to June 9, 1944, the county treasurer, A. S. Ferguson, had currently deposited in the Commercial National Bank of Kansas City — a bank designated by the board as a depository of county funds — the fees collected under the statute. Such fees were deposited in the general fund of the county but credited on the treasurer’s books to an automobile fee fund.

It appears that some time prior to June 9, 1944, the board had refused to allow a claim which had been approved by the county auditor covering certain supplies furnished, upon order of the treasurer, in connection with administration of the act. Thereupon the claimant brought action upon the claim, in the district court, against [82]*82the treasurer. In that action the treasurer was represented by the county attorney and in his answer admitted that the supplies in question had been ordered by him; averred that the supplies were needed in administering the act and were used exclusively for that purpose, that the funds collected were at all times deposited in the county fund in his name as county treasurer, that his books at all times showed the amount credited to fees collected under the act, that he was not indebted to the claimant and that the claim should be allowed and paid by the board. Any question as to the merits of the controversy involved in that litigation is not before us and this brief recital concerning it is made solely to indicate the origin and background of the instant action. The court found for the claimant and held that the treasurer is charged by statute with administering the act and is responsible, as custodian, for the money collected under it.

On June 9, 1944, following the judgment rendered against him on the. claim, the treasurer transferred — without authorization therefor from the board — to a special fund the balance in the general fund credited on his books to automobile fees. Such balance amounted to $3,543.50. Such special fund, deposited in the same bank, was designated “A. S. Ferguson, County Treasurer, Custodian of State Auto Funds.” Whereupon the county commissioners brought the instant proceeding to test their rights and responsibilities and those of the treasurer under the act.

The section in controversy, G. S. 1943 Supp., 8-145, is as follows:

“All registration and certificate of title fees shall be paid to the county treasurer of the county in which the applicant for registration resides or has his office or principal place of business within this state, and the said county treasurer shall issue his receipt in triplicate, on blanks to be furnished by the department, one copy of which shall be filed in the county treasurer’s office, one copy to be delivered to the applicant, and the county treasurer shall forthwith transmit the original copy, together with fifteen cents for each motor vehicle and each motor vehicle dealer’s license application, and fifteen cents for each motorcycle license application, and fifteen cents for each application for transfer of license number plates, and fifteen cents for each application for registration of a trailer, semi-trailer, and pole trailer, and thirty cents for each application for a certificate of title to the vehicle commissioner. The county treasurer shall deposit twenty cents of each license application, ten cents out of each application for transfer of license number plates and twenty cents out of each application for a certificate of title, collected by him under this act, in a special fund, which, fund is hereby appropriated for the use of the county treasurer in paying for necessary help and expenses incidental to the administration of his duties in accordance with the provisions of this law: PROVIDED, That any [83]*83balance remaining in such fund at the close of any calendar year shall be withdrawn and credited to the general fund of the said county. The county treasurer shall remit the remainder of all such registration and certificate of title fees to the state treasurer, to be credited to the highway fund.” (Italics supplied.)

The contentions of the board, petitioner here, may be summarized as follows:

(a) The fees collected under section 8-145 are public moneys, defined as follows by G. S. 1935, 9-301:

“That all moneys which shall come into the hands of any officer of any county, township, school district, city or village, or any municipal or public corporation or any other political subdivision within this state, pursuant to any provision of law authorizing such officer to collect or receive the same, shall be deemed public moneys within the meaning of this act.”

(b) Being public moneys such fee collections must be deposited in compliance with G. S. 1935, 9-303, the pertinent provision of which is as follows:

“That upon designation of any depository or depositories in compliance with the provisions of this act, it shall be the duty of the officer, as provided by section 1 (9-301) of this act, of any political subdivision within this state to deposit all public moneys coming into his hands, therein in his name and his official title.”

(c) Such fee collections are “county funds” and must be deposited as such, as required by G. S. 1943 Supp., 19-530, the pertinent provisions of which are as follows:

“That in all counties of this state the county treasurer shall deposit daily all the funds and moneys whatsoever kind that shall come into his possession by virtue of his office as such county treasurer, in his name as such treasurer, in one or more responsible banks located in the county and designated by the board of county commissioners as county depositories, and no interest shall be paid thereon. . . .”

(d) Control of expenditures in connection with the administration of the county treasurer’s duties under section 8-145 is in the board, under the provisions of G. S. 1935,19-229, which is as follows:

“The boards of county commissioners of the several counties of this state shall have exclusive control of all expenditures accruing, either in the publication of delinquent tax lists, treasurer’s notices, county printing, or any other county expenditures.”

(e) The payment of help necessary in administering section 8-145 is within the control of the board, under the provisions of G.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Weber v. Board of County Commissioners
221 P.3d 1094 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 2009)
Weber v. BOARD OF COM'RS OF MARSHALL COUNTY
221 P.3d 1094 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 2009)
Marcus v. Kansas, Department of Revenue
170 F.3d 1305 (Tenth Circuit, 1999)
Attorney General Opinion No.
Kansas Attorney General Reports, 1996
Moody v. Edmondson
269 P.2d 462 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1954)
Cutrel v. Best
217 P.2d 270 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1950)
State v. Christensen
199 P.2d 475 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1948)
Board of County Commissioners v. Avis
183 P.2d 462 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1947)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
151 P.2d 694, 159 Kan. 80, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/board-of-county-commissioners-v-ferguson-kan-1944.