Taylor Ex Rel. Laurel County v. Gaines

72 S.W.2d 16, 254 Ky. 602, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 121
CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)
DecidedMay 29, 1934
StatusPublished

This text of 72 S.W.2d 16 (Taylor Ex Rel. Laurel County v. Gaines) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Taylor Ex Rel. Laurel County v. Gaines, 72 S.W.2d 16, 254 Ky. 602, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 121 (Ky. 1934).

Opinion

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Ratliff

Affirming.

J. P. Taylor, as a citizen and taxpayer for himself and all other taxpayers of Laurel county, brought this action in the Laurel circuit court against G-. W. Gaines, George R. Herron, and James B. Reams, to recover of Gaines, as jailer of Laurel county, the principal, and Herron and Reams, as the sureties on the official bond of Gaines, covering Gaines’ term of office beginning the first Monday in January, 1930, and ending December 31, 1933, alleging that he had received the amount sought to be recovered in excess of the maximum, annual salary authorized by the Constitution (Const, sec. 246). Suing in the same capacity, Taylor instituted another action in the Laurel circuit court against William Broughton, jailer of Laurel county, D. C. Edwards, and Nat B. Sewell, the sureties on his official bond, to recover of them the amount received by Broughton as jailer in excess of the maximum, annual salary during his term of office, permitted by the Constitution. The two actions were tried separately and a judgment entered dismissing the petition in each case.

The pleadings, the issues, the evidence, and the *603 questions of law presented in the two cases are identical. On an appeal to this court in the action against Broughton and his sureties, the judgment of the circuit court was affirmed (J. J. Taylor et al. v. Broughton et al., 254 Ky. 265, 71 S. W. (2d) 634, decided May 15, 1934).

The arguments presented in the present case and the authorities cited to sustain the same were before us in the Broughton Case. It will be of no benefit to the parties to this appeal again to review the pleadings, the issues, the evidence, and the law; therefore, on the authority of Taylor v. Broughton, supra, the judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

Taylor, for Use and Benefit, Etc. v. Broughton
71 S.W.2d 635 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1934)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
72 S.W.2d 16, 254 Ky. 602, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 121, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-ex-rel-laurel-county-v-gaines-kyctapphigh-1934.