County of Mendocino v. Johnson

Citations

• 125 Cal. 337
• 58 P. 5
• 1899 Cal. LEXIS 859

Syllabus

<p>Action upon Bond of Tax-Oollectob—Burden of Pboof—Default—Payment.—In an action against a tax-collector, on his official bond, to recover money collected and not paid over, the burden of proof for the plaintiff is sustained by showing that the tax-collector made default in failing to pay over, at the end of his term, moneys due the county; and the burden of proof is then on the defendants to show payment in full.</p> <p>Id.—Mode of Payment—Offeb of Proof.—A payment to the tax-collector in a mode other than that expressly provided by law, will not exonerate the tax-collector or his bondsmen from an action by the county, unless it is proved that the county actually received the money, as distinguished from a mere deposit thereof with the treasurer. . It is error to refuse an offer of proof that the county actually received the money, without proof first made of a compliance with the county government act by the tax-collector.</p> <p>Id.—Evidence—Receipts to Tax-Collectobt—Testimony of Treasures—Possible Amendment of Complaint.—It is error to exclude from evidence receipts given by the treasurer to the tax-collector, notwithstanding the evidence of the treasurer that a receipt for $3,000 was fraudulently obtained, and that no such payment was in fact made; nor can the exclusion be excused as without Injury, on the ground that the complaint might thereafter be amended by charging the tax-collector with what he showed by the receipts was paid above the amount alleged, and crediting him accordingly, still leaving the discrepancy of $3,000 to be accounted for by the tax-collector.</p>