Skip to main content
· 3/15/1898

Mitchell v. Patterson

Citations

  • 120 Cal. 286
  • 52 P. 589
  • 1898 Cal. LEXIS 754

Syllabus

<p>Irrigation District—Salaries of Officers—Warrants upon Treasurer— Mandamus—Misnomer—Clerical Error—Amendment.—In a mandamus proceeding to compel the treasurer of an irrigation district to pay-warrants issued to a former officer of the district for salary accrued and unpaid during his incumbency, where one of the warrants was fully described in the complaint, including the signature of the presiident of the district by his correct name, a misnomer in regard to such name in the findings, judgment, and statement of the case is a mere clerical error, which may be corrected by order upon the court’s attention being called to it at any time before appeal taken, or after the cause is remanded, and where an error of a similar character occurs in the order for amendment, it may be likewise amended by further order.</p> <p>Id.—Warrants upon General Fund—Water Fund in Effect Part of General Fund.—A fund carried on the treasurer’s books of an irrigation district as “the water fund,” which was wholly derived from toils and charges fixed by the board of directors of the district upon consumers of water using the pipes and canals of the district, is, in effect, part of the general fund applicable to the payment of salaries and employees and other expenses named in section 37 of the Wright act, where the board has not provided for the payment of such expenditures by a levy of assessments, or by both the tolls and assessments.</p> <p>In.—Purchase of Water Right Certificates—Construction Fund—Payment from Water Fund.—A purchase of water right certificates from a water company by an irrigation district is chargeable to the “construction fund,” which is supplied from the sale of bonds, and semiannual payments to he made upon such certificates are part of the contract of purchase, and should be paid out of the construction fund, and cannot be paid out of the fund derived from the water supply, so as to interfere with the payment of salaries and expenses therefrom, where no other fund

Judges: Haynes

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.