State ex rel. Dawson v. Martin

Supreme Court of Kansas

State ex rel. Dawson v. Martin

118 P. 1119, 85 Kan. 879, 1911 Kan. LEXIS 167

CourtSupreme Court of Kansas

DecidedNovember 11, 1911

DocketNo. 17,728

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 118 P. 1119 (State ex rel. Dawson v. Martin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State ex rel. Dawson v. Martin, 118 P. 1119, 85 Kan. 879, 1911 Kan. LEXIS 167 (kan 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The motion to set aside the order which suspended the defendant from the office of sheriff is denied, it being-held that even if the act providing for the removal of unfaithful public officers does not affect officers for whose removal the constitution expressly provides, it is valid at least so far as it applies to other public officers, including a sheriff. The grounds for this holding will be stated in the opinion to be filed on the final disposition of the case. No order can be made in this proceeding requiring the clerk of the district court to pay over the fees earned by the successor of defendant. While Bramlette, who is sheriff for the time being, is entitled to all fees due for services performed by him while acting- as sheriff, the clerk of the district court, who is withholding such fees, is not a party to this proceeding and, therefore, an effective order can not be made upon him.

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

Per Curiam:

The motion to set aside the order which suspended the defendant from the office of sheriff is denied, it being-held that even if the act providing for the removal of unfaithful public officers does not affect officers for whose removal the constitution expressly provides, it is valid at least so far as it applies to other public officers, including a sheriff. The grounds for this holding will be stated in the opinion to be filed on the final disposition of the case. No order can be made in this proceeding requiring the clerk of the district court to pay over the fees earned by the successor of defendant. While Bramlette, who is sheriff for the time being, is entitled to all fees due for services performed by him while acting- as sheriff, the clerk of the district court, who is withholding such fees, is not a party to this proceeding and, therefore, an effective order can not be made upon him.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

118 P. 1119, 85 Kan. 879, 1911 Kan. LEXIS 167, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-dawson-v-martin-kan-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack