Chapman v. County of Berrien

Michigan Supreme Court

Chapman v. County of Berrien

15 N.W. 489, 50 Mich. 311, 1883 Mich. LEXIS 787

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedApril 18, 1883

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 15 N.W. 489 (Chapman v. County of Berrien) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chapman v. County of Berrien, 15 N.W. 489, 50 Mich. 311, 1883 Mich. LEXIS 787 (Mich. 1883).

Pincite

Opinion

Campbell, J.

The only question arising in this case relates to the right of plaintiff to recover a portion remaining unpaid of his salary as judge of probate of Berrien county, as fixed by the board of supervisors in the beginning of January, 1873, when his four-years’ term was opening. He was elected in 1872, and the salary thus fixed at $1500. In January, 1875, the salary was sought to be reduced to $1000, but he declined to receive that rate except under protest, and sued seasonably for the balance. The court below gave judgment in his favor, on the ground that the action of January, 1873, was the first action had under the law of 1871, requiring the supervisors to act, and was binding.

This was, we think, correct. In Powoiellds case 40 Mich. 587, the first action taken by the board, as then shown to us, was after the law had been amended in 1873, and we held it could not subsequently be changed. It afterwards appeared on an application for a rehearing, that earlier action had been had, and the judgment was recalled. The law of 1873 was a mere amendment of that of 1871 so far as it concerned "Wayne county, and no further, and would not, in our opinion, justify the rescission of the vote fixing the salary at the beginning of plaintiff’s term. It does not, like the law of 1871, repeal the former legislation, and it is manifestly designed for no such purpose.

We think the judgment should be affirmed with costs.

The other Justices concurred.

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

Campbell, J.

The only question arising in this case relates to the right of plaintiff to recover a portion remaining unpaid of his salary as judge of probate of Berrien county, as fixed by the board of supervisors in the beginning of January, 1873, when his four-years’ term was opening. He was elected in 1872, and the salary thus fixed at $1500. In January, 1875, the salary was sought to be reduced to $1000, but he declined to receive that rate except under protest, and sued seasonably for the balance. The court below gave judgment in his favor, on the ground that the action of January, 1873, was the first action had under the law of 1871, requiring the supervisors to act, and was binding.

This was, we think, correct. In Powoiellds case 40 Mich. 587, the first action taken by the board, as then shown to us, was after the law had been amended in 1873, and we held it could not subsequently be changed. It afterwards appeared on an application for a rehearing, that earlier action had been had, and the judgment was recalled. The law of 1873 was a mere amendment of that of 1871 so far as it concerned "Wayne county, and no further, and would not, in our opinion, justify the rescission of the vote fixing the salary at the beginning of plaintiff’s term. It does not, like the law of 1871, repeal the former legislation, and it is manifestly designed for no such purpose.

We think the judgment should be affirmed with costs.

The other Justices concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 N.W. 489, 50 Mich. 311, 1883 Mich. LEXIS 787, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chapman-v-county-of-berrien-mich-1883.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack