Gammon v. Lafayette County

76 Mo. 675
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedOctober 15, 1882
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 76 Mo. 675 (Gammon v. Lafayette County) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gammon v. Lafayette County, 76 Mo. 675 (Mo. 1882).

Opinion

Henry, J.

Plaintiff sued the county before a justice of the peace on an account for $9.25, the aggregate of fees claimed by him as clerk of the probate court of said county, for opening and adjourning orders of said court entered of record from April 8th to July 10th, 1878, inclusive, except Sundays. Defendant had judgment both in the jus[676]*676tice’s court and the circuit court, and plaintiff has appealed to this coiirt. It is agreed that plaintiff was judge' and ex-officio clerk of the probate court of Lafayette county, and the only question to be determined is whether plaintiff is entitled by law to the fees claimed.

The right of a public officer to- fees is derived from the statute. He is entitled to no fees for services he may perform, as such officer, unless the statute gives it. When the statute fails to provide a fee for service he is required to perform as a public officer, he has no claim upon the State for compensation for such service.

Sections 6, '7 and 8, Wagner’s Statutes, 620, 621, 622, leave no doubt in our minds that plaintiff is not entitled to the fees claimed. Section 6 schedules the fees allowed clerks of county courts, and section 7 those allowed clerks of county courts for services, “ in probate and other business relating to settlements of guardians, curators, idiots and lunatics.” By section 6 a fee of fifteen cents is allowed the clerk of the county court “ for all orders not otherwise provided for,” and that entitles him to a fee for each opening and adjourning order. No such provision is found in the schedule of fees allowed the clerk of that court for services in probate ’business, and section 8 provides that “judges of probate shall have such fees for their services as are allowed by law to clerks of county courts for like services.” That the county had previously paid plaintiff and others for similar services, is immaterial. A misconception of the statute by the county court, no matter how long it may have been acted upon by that tribunal, will not change the law.

All concurring,

the judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

Opinion No. 80-81 (1981)
Missouri Attorney General Reports, 1981
State ex rel. Forsee v. Cowan
284 S.W.2d 478 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1955)
State Ex Rel. Nicolai v. Nolte
180 S.W.2d 740 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1944)
Maxwell v. Andrew County
146 S.W.2d 621 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1941)
Scott and Morrison v. Endicott
38 S.W.2d 67 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1931)
State ex rel. Evans v. Gordon
245 Mo. 12 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1912)
State ex rel. Harrison v. Patterson
132 S.W. 1183 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1910)
Sanderson v. Pike County
93 S.W. 942 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1906)
State ex rel. Linn County v. Adams
72 S.W. 655 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1903)
Jackson County v. Stone
68 S.W. 926 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1902)
State ex rel. Chapman v. Walbridge
54 S.W. 447 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1899)
State ex rel. Troll v. Brown
47 S.W. 504 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1898)
State ex rel. Wedeking v. McCracken
60 Mo. App. 650 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1895)
State ex rel. Stewart v. Wofford
22 S.W. 486 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1893)
Givens v. Daviess County
107 Mo. 603 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1891)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
76 Mo. 675, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gammon-v-lafayette-county-mo-1882.