Moore v. Williams

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Moore v. Williams

205 S.W. 911, 181 Ky. 816, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 608

DecidedOctober 29, 1918

StatusPublished

This text of 205 S.W. 911 (Moore v. Williams) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Moore v. Williams, 205 S.W. 911, 181 Ky. 816, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 608 (Ky. Ct. App. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion of the Court by

William Rogers Clay, Commissioner

Dismissing the appeal.

W. L. Moore and others, citizens and taxpayers of the city of Williamsburg, brought this suit against J. A. Williams, as marshal of said city, for the purpose of obtaining a mandamus to compel him to restore to the city the sum of $100.00, alleged to have been illegally appropriated and paid to him by the city council. A demurrer was sustained to the petition and the petition dismissed. Plaintiffs appeal.

The petition charges in substance that Williams, while acting as marshal, was sued by one Talmage Burnett for personal injuries inflicted by Williams; that although the city was not a party to the proceeding, it subsequently appropriated and paid to the defendant the sum of $100.00 for expenses incurred in making his defense, and that said payment was unauthorized, illegal and void. It was further alleged that the defendant was insolvent and a mandamus was asked compelling him to pay back the money thus illegally collected.

This is not a suit to require the defendant to pay tp the city fees, which he collected by virtue of his office, and which the law required him to pay over to the city. The money which he received was appropriated and paid to him by the city council. If it be true that the appropriation was illegal, the law merely implied an obligation to repay the money, and he thereby became the mere debt- or of the city. In its final analysis, therefore, the suit is nothing more nor less than a proceeding to collect a mere debt of $100.00 by mandamus. Mandamus will not lie for that purpose. Montenegro-Riehm Music Co. v. Board of [818]*818Education of Louisville, 147 Ky. 720, 145 S. W. 741. The amount is not sufficient to give this court jurisdiction. That being true, jurisdiction cannot be conferred by asking for a mandamus when it is clear that mandamus will not lie, and the sole purpose of asking it was to make the case appealable. It therefore follows that the appeal cannot be entertained.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Opinion of the Court by

William Rogers Clay, Commissioner

Dismissing the appeal.

W. L. Moore and others, citizens and taxpayers of the city of Williamsburg, brought this suit against J. A. Williams, as marshal of said city, for the purpose of obtaining a mandamus to compel him to restore to the city the sum of $100.00, alleged to have been illegally appropriated and paid to him by the city council. A demurrer was sustained to the petition and the petition dismissed. Plaintiffs appeal.

The petition charges in substance that Williams, while acting as marshal, was sued by one Talmage Burnett for personal injuries inflicted by Williams; that although the city was not a party to the proceeding, it subsequently appropriated and paid to the defendant the sum of $100.00 for expenses incurred in making his defense, and that said payment was unauthorized, illegal and void. It was further alleged that the defendant was insolvent and a mandamus was asked compelling him to pay back the money thus illegally collected.

This is not a suit to require the defendant to pay tp the city fees, which he collected by virtue of his office, and which the law required him to pay over to the city. The money which he received was appropriated and paid to him by the city council. If it be true that the appropriation was illegal, the law merely implied an obligation to repay the money, and he thereby became the mere debt- or of the city. In its final analysis, therefore, the suit is nothing more nor less than a proceeding to collect a mere debt of $100.00 by mandamus. Mandamus will not lie for that purpose. Montenegro-Riehm Music Co. v. Board of [818]*818Education of Louisville, 147 Ky. 720, 145 S. W. 741. The amount is not sufficient to give this court jurisdiction. That being true, jurisdiction cannot be conferred by asking for a mandamus when it is clear that mandamus will not lie, and the sole purpose of asking it was to make the case appealable. It therefore follows that the appeal cannot be entertained.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

205 S.W. 911, 181 Ky. 816, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 608, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moore-v-williams-kyctapp-1918.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack