Chinn v. Shackelford

78 S.W. 908, 117 Ky. 700, 1904 Ky. LEXIS 234
CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky
DecidedFebruary 24, 1904
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 78 S.W. 908 (Chinn v. Shackelford) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Chinn v. Shackelford, 78 S.W. 908, 117 Ky. 700, 1904 Ky. LEXIS 234 (Ky. Ct. App. 1904).

Opinion

Opinion of the court by

JUDGE HOBSON

Reversing.

The term of S. J. Shackelford as clerk of this court expired on the first Monday in January, 1904. He was succeeded by J. Morgan Chinn. At the expiration of the term there were a number of fee hills outstanding, and unpaid, due the clerk of this court for services rendered. This agreed case between Shackelford, Chinn, and the Auditor [701]*701of the State was 'filed to determine what should he done with these fee bills. The question turns on the construction of the provisions of sections 38-54 of the act “relating to fees,” approved June 15, 1893 (Acts 1893, pp. 1156-1162, c. 226"), which with some amendments, now constitute sections 1761-1777 Ky. St., 1903. As the question before - us turns on the construction of the original act, we will refer to the sections of it.

Section 38 is in these words: “The clerk of the circuit court, the clerk of the county court, commissioners, receivers, examiners, and the sheriff .of each county having a population of seventy-five thousand or over, shall, after the terms of the present incumbents, respectively expire, and on the first day of each month, severally send to the Auditor of Public Accounts a statement, subscribed and sworn to by each of them, showing the amount of money received or collected by or for each of them the preceding month as fees or compensation for official duties, and shall, with such statement, send to the Auditor the amount so collected or' received.” Section 39 provides that each of the officers mentioned above shall receive an annual salary of $5,000, and that the number of deputies, their compensation, and the necessary expenses of the office shall be fixed by an order of court, which shall be forwarded to the Auditor. Section 40 provides that the chief deputy shall re-’ ceive a salary of $2,000, and the other deputies not exceeding $1,500 each. Section 41 provides that the salary of each officer and his deputies, and the expenses of the office, shall be paid monthly by the Treasurer of the State upon the warrant, of the Auditor, if 75 per cent, of the amount paid into the treasury during the month is sufficient to- pay them, and that if there is a deficit for any month it may be made [702]*702up out of the amount paid in any succeeding month.. Section 42 provides a penalty if the officer fails to make the report or pay the money any month. Section 43 makes it a felony if the officer knowingly makes a false report. Then follows section 44, which is in these words: “When the term of any chief officer shall expire, or he shall die or resign, or be removed from office, he or his personal representative, trustee or committee, as the case may be, shall at once deliver to his successor in office all accounts-, claims, and fees due to such officer in his official capacity; and it shall be the duty of such successor to have such fees, claims and accounts collected, or the Auditor may, in his,.discretion, when said accounts, fees and claims are so delivered to the successor, appoint some person to collect them,, and if he does, the successor shall at once, or at any time when demanded by such person, deliver to him all accounts, fees and claims uncollected. The- successor or the person appointed by the Auditor^ as the ca&e may be, shall every sixty days after receiving such accounts, fees and claims report to the Auditor, under oath, the amount collected thereon, and at the same time, pay to the Auditor the amount so collected, and shall continue to so report for three years, unless the accounts, fees and claims are sooner collected.” Section 45 directs that the Auditor shall draw his warrant on the Treasurer in favor of the person collecting for an amount equal to 20 per cent, of the sums so paid into the treasury, and that this shall be in full of the compensation allowed to collector. Section 46 provides that, if the amount paid to any officer during his term shall not have been sufficient to pay the salaries and expenses of the office, the Auditor shall, out of the money so collected, pay to the person entitled thereto an amount sufficient to supply the deficit due for salaries and expenses, but that [703]*703he must not so pay exceeding 75 per cent, of the amount of fees which accrued during the term, and were collected and paid into the treasury. Section 47 and section 48 provide penalties for the violation of the above provisions. Sections 49-52, make similar provisions as to the jailer in counties having a population of 75,000 or over, the principal difference being that the jailer is required to report monthly not only his collections, but also all sums due him, money due from the State being treated as paid. Section 53 regulates the jailer, county clerk, circuit cl.erk, commissioners, receiver’s, examiners, and sheriff in a county having a population of over 40,000 and under 75,000. These are required to make annual reports, and to pay over annually the balance in their hands. Then follows section 54, which is the only one in which the clerk of the Court of Appeals is mentioned. So far as material it, as originally enacted, reads as follows: “The Clerk of the Court of Appeals and each assessor in a county having a population of over seventy-five thousand shall annually in the month of January report to the Auditor under oath the amount received by him .on account of his -official duties or position, from all sources during the preceding year, as well as the amount paid out by him for deputies! or assistants, giving the amount paid to each and for expenses of his office; and if it shall appear from such statement that any such officer received as compensation on account of his office from all sources more than four thousand dollars ($4,000.00) after the payment of his deputies or assistants and all the expenses of his office, such officer shall with such statement pay to the Auditor the amount so received in excess of $4,000.00. . . . The salaries of the deputies of the clerk of the ■Court of Appeals shall be fixed by an order of the Court of Appeals, a copy of which order shall be filed with the Auditor [704]*704by the clerk of said court when made.” By an act approved March 4, 1898 (Acts 1898, p. 85, c. 31), the following words were added to this section: “If it shall appear from the reports required to be made to the Auditor by the clerk of the Court of Appeals under this section, that the amount earned and received by said clerk on account' of his office is not sufficient to pay him $4,000.00 together with the salaries of his deputies or assistants and the other legitimate expenses of his office, in any year, then said officer may retain out of money earned or received by him on account of his official duties in said office during the year or years following, enough to make up such deficit.” Another amendment to the act was made by the act of March 21, 1900 (Acts 1900, p. 73, c. 25), but it refers only to commissioners and receivers in counties having a. population of 75,000 or over, being an amendment to section 38 above quoted, and is therefore not material here. The case before us turns on the question whether section 44, above quoted, applies to the clerk of the Court of Appeals. If it does not, the fees due at the end of Shackelford’s term, being due the office, may be collected by the incumbent of the office. But if this section applies, these fees, whether collected by Chinn or by a person appointed by the Auditor, must be paid into the treasury, and are not available for the payment of the salaries or expenses of the office under section 54.

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

Related

Hager v. Franklin
81 S.W. 926 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1904)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
78 S.W. 908, 117 Ky. 700, 1904 Ky. LEXIS 234, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chinn-v-shackelford-kyctapp-1904.