Stetson v. Board of Supervisors

Michigan Supreme Court

Stetson v. Board of Supervisors

1 McGrath 1537, 36 McGrath 9

DecidedJanuary 23, 1877

StatusPublished

This text of 1 McGrath 1537 (Stetson v. Board of Supervisors) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Stetson v. Board of Supervisors, 1 McGrath 1537, 36 McGrath 9 (Mich. 1877).

Pincite

Opinion

To compel the allowance of relator’s claim for services performed by him during the year 1876, while he was county clerk.

Denied January 23, 1877.

Held, (1) under the statute (Comp. L., 1871, Sec. 470), a county clerk whose compensation has been fixed by the board of supervisors at a specified annual salary, is entitled to no additional compensation for services as clerk of the board of supervisor:.; (2) a county clerk whose salary has been fixed thus is not entitled to recover extra compensation from the county for services as clerk of the building committee, and in purchasing wood and trees, etc., except upon a showing of facts from which a contract for payment could be implied; and (4) that notwithstanding the statute allows the county clerk specific fees for services as clerk in criminal cases, drawing juries, recording births, deaths, etc., it is competent for the board of supervisors to make an allowance by way of annual salary which shall be in full for all services he is required as county clerk to perform, and where the board have undertaken to do this, and the clerk is made to understand that such is their design, he cannot afterwards lawfully make claim to extra compensation for any such services.

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

To compel the allowance of relator’s claim for services performed by him during the year 1876, while he was county clerk.

Denied January 23, 1877.

Held, (1) under the statute (Comp. L., 1871, Sec. 470), a county clerk whose compensation has been fixed by the board of supervisors at a specified annual salary, is entitled to no additional compensation for services as clerk of the board of supervisor:.; (2) a county clerk whose salary has been fixed thus is not entitled to recover extra compensation from the county for services as clerk of the building committee, and in purchasing wood and trees, etc., except upon a showing of facts from which a contract for payment could be implied; and (4) that notwithstanding the statute allows the county clerk specific fees for services as clerk in criminal cases, drawing juries, recording births, deaths, etc., it is competent for the board of supervisors to make an allowance by way of annual salary which shall be in full for all services he is required as county clerk to perform, and where the board have undertaken to do this, and the clerk is made to understand that such is their design, he cannot afterwards lawfully make claim to extra compensation for any such services.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 McGrath 1537, 36 McGrath 9, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stetson-v-board-of-supervisors-mich-1877.