Harris v. Garner

Supreme Court of Georgia

Harris v. Garner

128 S.E. 913, 160 Ga. 752, 1925 Ga. LEXIS 247

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJuly 18, 1925

DocketNo. 4689

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 128 S.E. 913 (Harris v. Garner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Harris v. Garner, 128 S.E. 913, 160 Ga. 752, 1925 Ga. LEXIS 247 (Ga. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

Hill, J.

1. The sheriff brought a petition for mandamus against the board of commissioners of roads and revenues of Gwinnett County, to compel them to approve his accounts which he alleged to be correct, and to issue an order on the county treasury for payment of the same. By their answer the board made an issue as to the correctness of his accounts, and also by way of set-off declared upon certain items of indebtedness of the sheriff to the county. After hearing the ease the court granted a mandamus absolute, and disallowed the county’s counter-claim. Under the evidence submitted to the court for consideration this was error. If the officer seeking the mandamus was indebted to the county the amount claimed by the board, the sheriff was not entitled to an order for any amount. The evidence was conflicting; and that being true, it should not have been disposed of by a ruling of the judge, but by a jury upon issues properly submitted.

2. It was not error for the judge to disallow the county’s claim against the officer seeking the mandamus, for damages arising from closing a road, or for damages resulting from reducing the value of automobiles from their illegal use; as the board could not, in the absence of allegations and proof of the insolvency of the officer, set off a tort against a claim based upon an account.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices eoneu/r.

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

Hill, J.

1. The sheriff brought a petition for mandamus against the board of commissioners of roads and revenues of Gwinnett County, to compel them to approve his accounts which he alleged to be correct, and to issue an order on the county treasury for payment of the same. By their answer the board made an issue as to the correctness of his accounts, and also by way of set-off declared upon certain items of indebtedness of the sheriff to the county. After hearing the ease the court granted a mandamus absolute, and disallowed the county’s counter-claim. Under the evidence submitted to the court for consideration this was error. If the officer seeking the mandamus was indebted to the county the amount claimed by the board, the sheriff was not entitled to an order for any amount. The evidence was conflicting; and that being true, it should not have been disposed of by a ruling of the judge, but by a jury upon issues properly submitted.

2. It was not error for the judge to disallow the county’s claim against the officer seeking the mandamus, for damages arising from closing a road, or for damages resulting from reducing the value of automobiles from their illegal use; as the board could not, in the absence of allegations and proof of the insolvency of the officer, set off a tort against a claim based upon an account.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices eoneu/r.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

128 S.E. 913, 160 Ga. 752, 1925 Ga. LEXIS 247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harris-v-garner-ga-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack