Moren v. Blue

47 Ala. 709
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedJanuary 15, 1872
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 47 Ala. 709 (Moren v. Blue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Moren v. Blue, 47 Ala. 709 (Ala. 1872).

Opinion

RECK, C. J.

The members of the court áre unanimous in the opinion that the order of the circuit court awarding a mandamus in this case, is erroneous.

"We hold, that where the general assembly adjourns for a few days, for some special reason or purpose, both the members and the officers of the two houses are entitled to their per diem compensation; but when the adjournment is, say, for a month, longer or shorter, and the object is, that the members are to return to their homes, and the labors of the session are to cease; in such a case, neither the members nor the officers of the two houses are entitled, during the period of such an adjournment, to their per diem compensation.

The general rule is, that where public officers or servants receive a per diem compensation, there must be a per diem service. We can see no good reason to make the present case an exception to this general rule.

The order and judgment of the circuit court directing a mandamus to be issued, &c., are reversed, and the appellee’s petition is dismissed at his cost, both of this court and of said circuit court.

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

Related

County of Kauai v. Shiraishi
41 Haw. 156 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1955)
Shaw v. Carter
1931 OK 100 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1931)
Smith v. Auditor General
130 N.W. 557 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1911)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
47 Ala. 709, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moren-v-blue-ala-1872.