State ex rel. State Journal Co. v. Boyd

53 N.W. 1116, 36 Neb. 60, 1893 Neb. LEXIS 15
CourtNebraska Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 4, 1893
DocketNo. 5822
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 53 N.W. 1116 (State ex rel. State Journal Co. v. Boyd) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska 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. State Journal Co. v. Boyd, 53 N.W. 1116, 36 Neb. 60, 1893 Neb. LEXIS 15 (Neb. 1893).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The relator states in its application for a mandamus that “it is a corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws-of the state of Nebraska; that James E. Boyd is governor, and Thos. H. Benton auditor of the state of Nebraska; that on the 9th, 16th, 20th, 22d, 26th, and 31st days of January, and on the 9th, 16th, and 20th days of February, and the 6th and 31st days of March, of the year 1891, the relator herein sold and delivered to James E. Boyd, governor of the state of Nebraska, the following goods, wares,' and merchandise as shown by a bill of the same, which is hereto atl ached, marked ‘Exhibit A,' and made a part of this application.

[61]*61“ Relator alleges the fact to be that the said James E. Boyd, governor, purchased said goods for and on behalf of the state of Nebraska, to be used by the governor of said state in his office as governor, and that the said bill has never been paid, nor any part thereof, although the same is long past due.

“Relator further alleges the fact to be that the said. James E. Boyd, governor, has failed, neglected, and refused to approve said bill, or to approve a voucher drawn for the same, and that the said Thos. H. Benton, as auditor of the state of Nebraska, has refused to draw a warrant for the payment of said bill, assigning as the reason therefor that the goods, having been purchased by the governor for his department, it was his duty to approve or O. K. the said bill as being correct, and that the said auditor has refused to draw a warrant for the same because the said James E. Boyd, governor, has refused to approve the said bill as correct, due and owing to the relator.

“Relator further alleges the fact to be that the prices charged in said bill for said goods were the reasonable value of the same, and that the relator herein is entitled to the payment from the respondents herein of the sum of $386.60, together with interest thereon as provided by law, and that the respondents, and each of them, have refused to pay the said claim, or to draw a warrant for the same, and that the relator herein is remediless in the premises except by the interposition of this court of the writ of mandamus.

Relator further represents to the court that the legislature of the state of Nebraska appropriated for the year ending March 31, 1892, and March 31, 1893, for the office of the governor of the state of Nebraska, for the purpose of paying for such books, blanks, and printing as might be used in said office, the sum of $600, and for the purpose of buying stationery, the sum of $500, and a contingent of the sum of $2,000, and for postage the sum of [62]*62$100, and that there is at this time a sufficient sum of money in the funds so designated and placed at the disposal of the said governor of the state of Nebraska against which warrants may be drawn for the payment of the relator’s claim.

“The relator further alleges the fact to be that the said James E. Boyd, as governor, had not incurred indebtedness beyond the amount appropriated by the legislature for his department at the time the indebtedness herein sought to be collected was incurred.

“Wherefore the relator prays for a writ of mandamusf directed to James E. Boyd, governor of the state of Nebraska, commanding him to approve said bill as correct, and that upou the approval of the same by him, that the said Thos. H. Benton, auditor of the state of Nebraska, be directed to draw a warrant in favor of the relator herein for the amount of said bill, to-wit, the sum of $386.60, together with interest thereon at the rate of seven per cent per annum from the 1st of October, 1892.”

To this the governor files an answer as follows:

“Comes now James E. Boyd, governor of the state of Nebraska, one of the respondents in the foregoing action, and for answer to said application for a writ of mandamus, herein filed by said relator, says:

“He admits that he is governor of the state of Nebraska, duly elected, qualified, and acting as such, and was such governor during all the time mentioned and described in said plaintiff’s application, that is to say, from January 9th, 1891 to March 31st, 1891, and so continued to discharge the duties of governor of the state of Nebraska, until May 5th, 1891, when he was relieved of his said office by an order and judgment of this honorable court, which judgment continued in force until the same was reversed, on the 5th day of February, 1892. Since which time, until the present, he has continued to exercise all the functions and discharge all the duties pertaining to said [63]*63office. That the legislature of the state of Nebraska, by an act duly passed and approved on the 6th day of April, 1891, made an appropriation for the office of the governor of the state of Nebraska, for the payment of the current expenses of said office for the year ending March 31st, 1892, and March 31st, 1893, as follows:

Postage................. $400

Books, blanks, and printing............................ 600

Stationery.................................................. 500

Telegraph, telephone, and express..................... 400

Contingent fund.......................................... 2,000

Furniture and repairs..................................... 200

House rent for governor................................. 2,000

Stenographer............................................... 300

Book-keeper and recorder............................... 225

Messenger.................................................. 225

Salary of governor........................................ 5,000

Salary of private secretary.............................. 4,000

Stenographer'............................................... 2,400

Clerk......................................................... 2,000

Messenger and assistant clerk........................... 2,000

“That the above and foregoing are all the items that were appropriated by said legislature for said office of governor, and all the funds of every description under the control of this respondent as such governor.

“This respondent further says that the several items of merchandise mentioned and described in relator’s application for a writ of mandamus consist of stationery, and stationery alone, and if properly chargeable at all, were all chargeable to the item of stationery mentioned in said appropriation of $500 for stationery, but this respondent alleges that said appropriation for said purpose has been exhausted in the payment of bills of stationery bought by this respondent and the occupant of the said office of governor during the time that he was not discharging the duties thereof, between May 5, 1891, and February 5, 1892, as [64]*64aforesaid, except the sum of $52.52, which is the entire amount still remaining on hand of the stationery fund, the sum of $447.48 having already been drawn as aforesaid. That of the item of $600, so as aforesaid appropriated for books, blanks, and printing, the sum of $135.33 remains, but no more. This respondent alleges that said bill of said relators is not properly chargeable to said fund, as the same is not books, blanks, and printing, or either of said articles.

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

Related

Lutz v. Post
14 P.R. 830 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1908)
Burton v. . Furman
20 S.E. 443 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1894)
State ex rel. Sayre v. Moore
25 L.R.A. 774 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1894)
Omaha Southern Railway Co. v. Todd
58 N.W. 289 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1894)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
53 N.W. 1116, 36 Neb. 60, 1893 Neb. LEXIS 15, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-state-journal-co-v-boyd-neb-1893.