Mottin v. Board of County Commissioners

Citations

• 89 Kan. 742
• 133 P. 165
• 1913 Kan. LEXIS 114

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Bridges — Authority of Commissioners — Repairs Not Exceeding $100. Necessary repairs upon a county bridge re- . quiring an expenditure not exceding $100 may be made under a contract with a committee of the hoard of county commissioners, or any suitable person authorized by the board tb make such repairs.</p> <p>2. —Estimates of Expenses of Repairs — Statute Complied <’ urith. Estimates made by a deputy county surveyor who is authorized by the board to make them, or by a committee of' the board having the matter in charge, or which having been made are' approved by the board, are a sufficient compliance with the statutory provisions requiring that estimates for such work shall be made.</p> <p>3. - Failure to Keep Records — Does Not Relieve County / •> from Liability. The careful conduct of public business by a county board requires that a record shall be kept of the reports of its committee, surveyor or other person delegated to make repairs upon bridges, and the action of the board thereon, but an otherwise valid claim is not defeated by the absence of a record of such proceedings.</p> <p>4. - Approval of Repairs on Bridge — Question of Fact for Jury. The approval of such work by the board of bounty commissioners may be shown as a fact although no formal motion is made, whether recorded or unrecorded.</p> <p>5. - County Commissioners — Implied Authority to Repair Bridges. “It is a general rule that persons dealing with th'e officers of a municipal corporation must ascertain the nature and extent of their authority, but in matters which are the proper subjects of municipal action, where there is no provision of law requiring that such authority shall be given by formal action of the governing body, it may be shown by a course of conduct which induces others honestly to assume and rely upon its existence.” (Roberts v. St. Marys, 78 Kan. 707, syl., 98 Pac. 211.)</p>