Harris v. More
This text of 11 P. 780 (Harris v. More) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The defendants executed an agreement in writing to pay moneys to any person furnishing evidence which would lead to the conviction of persons implicated in the commission of a crime. The agreement was delivered to the plaintiff. It contained a clause agreeing to pay plaintiff certain expenses in investigat- • ing the matter of the offense. The plaintiff rendered services in regard to discovering evidence and causing the same to be produced at the trial. The plaintiff was deputy sheriff of Los Angeles County, and the offense was committed and the trial had in another county
' As the plaintiff had no legal duty to perform, by virtue of his office of deputy sheriff, in regard to discovering the evidence and causing it to be produced, having no writ to execute, and the offense having been committed and the trial had out of his county, we do not think the policy of the law forbade his receiving the compensation. It was not compensation for the performance of any duty enjoined upon him by law.
No error appears in the transcript.
Judgment and order affirmed.
McKinstey, J., andMoKEisoN, C. J., concurred.
Hearing in Bank denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
11 P. 780, 70 Cal. 502, 1886 Cal. LEXIS 829, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harris-v-more-cal-1886.