Dismukes v. Board of Supervisors
58 Miss. 612
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the court.
The counsel assigned by the court to a person indicted for a capital crime and unable to employ counsel is not entitled to charge for his services and recover their value from the county. The Boat’d of Supervisors could not lawfully allow such a demand. It is prohibited from appropriating the money that [614] may come into the treasury of the county to any object not authorized by law, and there is no law authorizing an appropriation to this object.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Dismukes v. Board of Supervisors, 58 Miss. 612 (Mich. 1881).
58 Miss. 612 (Dismukes v. Board of Supervisors) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Mallard v. United States Dist. Court for Southern Dist. of Iowa
490 U.S. 296 (Supreme Court, 1989)
State Ex Rel. Scott v. Roper
688 S.W.2d 757 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1985)
Melvin Leroy Tyler v. Warden Lark Norton Y. Beilenson v. Treasurer of the United States
472 F.2d 1077 (Eighth Circuit, 1973)
Board of Supervisors of George County v. Bailey
236 So. 2d 420 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1970)
Weiner v. Fulton County
148 S.E.2d 143 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1966)
United States v. Edward J. Dillon, Petition of Manley B. Strayer
346 F.2d 633 (Ninth Circuit, 1965)
Lamar County v. Tally
77 So. 299 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1917)
Pardee v. Salt Lake County
118 P. 122 (Utah Supreme Court, 1911)