Moiles v. Watson

Michigan Supreme Court

Moiles v. Watson

1 McGrath 1397, 60 McGrath 415

DecidedApril 8, 1886

StatusPublished

This text of 1 McGrath 1397 (Moiles v. Watson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Moiles v. Watson, 1 McGrath 1397, 60 McGrath 415 (Mich. 1886).

Pincite

Opinion

To compel payment of a warrant drawn by the proper officers of a school district, for the amount of the primary school interest fund, apportioned by the superintendent of public instruction to said school district, and which had been paid to the respondent by the county treasurer.

Granted April 8, 1886.

It was insisted that relator was not a duly qualified officer, and [1399]*1399that the township clerk had made no apportionment of the fund to the district, under How. Stat., Secs 5088-5089.

Held, that the direction of the payment over of the money was made by the superintendent of public instruction under the statute, and that this direction followed the moneys into the hands of the township treasurer; that no other order or apportionment was necessary, and none can be made by the township clerk. Further, that the person presenting the order was the assessor de facto, and whether he was or not such officer de jure, cannot be determined in this proceeding. Mead vs. County Treasurer, 36 M., 416.

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

To compel payment of a warrant drawn by the proper officers of a school district, for the amount of the primary school interest fund, apportioned by the superintendent of public instruction to said school district, and which had been paid to the respondent by the county treasurer.

Granted April 8, 1886.

It was insisted that relator was not a duly qualified officer, and [1399]*1399that the township clerk had made no apportionment of the fund to the district, under How. Stat., Secs 5088-5089.

Held, that the direction of the payment over of the money was made by the superintendent of public instruction under the statute, and that this direction followed the moneys into the hands of the township treasurer; that no other order or apportionment was necessary, and none can be made by the township clerk. Further, that the person presenting the order was the assessor de facto, and whether he was or not such officer de jure, cannot be determined in this proceeding. Mead vs. County Treasurer, 36 M., 416.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 McGrath 1397, 60 McGrath 415, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moiles-v-watson-mich-1886.