State ex rel. Bradford v. Heskett

100 Ohio St. (N.S.) 338
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 8, 1919
DocketNo. 16351
StatusPublished

This text of 100 Ohio St. (N.S.) 338 (State ex rel. Bradford v. Heskett) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State ex rel. Bradford v. Heskett, 100 Ohio St. (N.S.) 338 (Ohio 1919).

Opinion

By the Court.

In determining whether an additional allowance shall be made to an officer for compensation of deputies, etc., under the provisions of Section 2980-1, General Code, while the judge of the court of common pleas, upon the hearing of an application therefor, may take into consideration the number of deputies, assistants, etc., employed or to bé employed, the character and amount of work necessary to be done, and any other matters connected therewith, for the purpose of determining whether the necessity for such additional allowance exists, the judge’s authority is limited by this.section to the fixing of an additional' aggregate sum of money in addition to the aggregate sum fixed by the county commissioners. He has no authority to specify by journal entry or otherwise what particular deputies, or at what [339]*339particular time during the ensuing year such allowance should be paid or expended.

Judgment for relator.

Nichols, C. J., Jones, Matthias, Johnson, Donahue, Wanamaker and Robinson, JJ., concur.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
100 Ohio St. (N.S.) 338, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-bradford-v-heskett-ohio-1919.