Heney v. Pima County

Arizona Supreme Court

Heney v. Pima County

17 P. 263, 2 Ariz. 443, 1888 Ariz. LEXIS 24

CourtArizona Supreme Court

DecidedApril 5, 1888

DocketCivil No. 243

StatusPublished

This text of 17 P. 263 (Heney v. Pima County) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Arizona Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Heney v. Pima County, 17 P. 263, 2 Ariz. 443, 1888 Ariz. LEXIS 24 (Ark. 1888).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this case we are asked to review the decision of this court in case of same title reported in 2 Ariz. 257, 14 Pac. 299. We see no good reason to change the views there expressed. The county is not bound by law to pay these fees; and, to be bound by contract, must assent to it. The board, however, have power to deal with the equities of the case, so forcibly urged upon us, and it rests with them to pay for these services as they see fit. The judgment is affirmed.

Wright, C. J., and Porter and Barnes, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this case we are asked to review the decision of this court in case of same title reported in 2 Ariz. 257, 14 Pac. 299. We see no good reason to change the views there expressed. The county is not bound by law to pay these fees; and, to be bound by contract, must assent to it. The board, however, have power to deal with the equities of the case, so forcibly urged upon us, and it rests with them to pay for these services as they see fit. The judgment is affirmed.

Wright, C. J., and Porter and Barnes, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 P. 263, 2 Ariz. 443, 1888 Ariz. LEXIS 24, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/heney-v-pima-county-ariz-1888.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack