OCR Text |
Show IIIElSTlllLir PIBMECISl Supreme Court Gives an Opinion in Suit Involving Public Improvements. BOND COMPANY WINS Suit Was Brought by R. M. Stinson & Co. Against Treasurer. Involving payments on special improvements im-provements done in the city, such as sidewalks, sewers, curbing and guttering gutter-ing and street paving, the state supreme su-preme court yesterday handed down a decision in the case of R. M. Stinson & Co. against Frank II. Godbe, city treasurer, and others. The decision is in favor of Stinson & Co., buyers and holders of many of the city improvement improve-ment warrants, compelling payment of interest on these warrants, whether or not the principal be paid in advance. Under this decision, according to City Treasurer Godbe, the fact that a taxpayer has paid two installments of his special improvement tax in advance, together with the interest to date, does not relieve him of the necessity of paying pay-ing the interest when it is due the following fol-lowing year. The interest must be paid, even though the principal due that year has already been paid Heretofore it has been the" city 's practice in such cases to wait until the next installment install-ment of the principal is due before collecting col-lecting the interest that has accrued. Stinson & Co. objected, claiming that the interest was due each year and that the city treasurer should collect it. Sometimes such collection might involve in-volve the sale of the property for the interest due on special improvement warrants. It is stated in the decision that "The sole and only question to be determined deter-mined by this court is whether respondent re-spondent (Stinson & Co.) can require tue payment of the interest yearly, or is obliged to wait until the next installment in-stallment becomes due before any additional ad-ditional interest can be collected." Reasons Are Given. Further on this point the decision says that "Some point is made that in view of the fact that each attached coupon represents the amount of one yearly installment, the city treasurer cannot compel the surrender of any coupon not yet due. and therefore the evidence of the obligation for interest will still be outstanding and might pass by sale or transfer into the hands of other parties who could rightfully make claim against the appellant (the city treasurer) or his successor for said interest so paid. 'Tt cannot be doubted that wbenever any payment is made the evidence of such payment should be indorsed upon the outstanding warrant war-rant so as to notify any subsequent purchaser pur-chaser of such payment. "Undoubtedly the appellant (the. city treasurer) has the right to see and know that the necessary indorsements are made upon each warrant when the annual interest is paid. The difficulty of obtaining evidence, however, of the payment can in no way affect the rights of respondent (Stinson & Co.) to have interest paid when due." The case was tried in the Third district dis-trict court and the judgment of that tribunal in favor of E. M. Stinson & Co. is affairmcd. Libel Suit Lost. In printing an editorial in connection with a news article telling of the temporary tem-porary suspension of William J. Lynch, former secretary of the state board of land commissioners, the Ogdeu Standard Stand-ard is declared by the state supreme court, in a decision handed down yes-terdav, yes-terdav, not defamatory of the character charac-ter of Mr. Lynch. The judgment of the Second district court in favor of the Ogden Standard, in an action brought bv Mr. Lvnch for libel, is affirmed. af-firmed. Mr. Lynch appealed from that judgment. Editorial Not Assertive. "The editorial," the opinion further savs, "was not assertive in any de-free, de-free, as we view it, that the appellant had committed the wrongs or betreyed the public trust as set forth in the itiuondo of his complaint; nor can it be t'airlv interpreted as referring to anv class of. officers except such as mav be found offenders upon investi-cation investi-cation of the acts and affairs of all state officers during the extended period of time the act of the legislature was designed to cover. "In this dav and age ot public affairs," af-fairs," the opinion continues. "when investigations are being so universally held as a matter of right and public policv, wa take it that no state official has 'a right to complain of the announcement an-nouncement through the public, press that his, with other state ofiicials' conduct con-duct is being or to be investigated in compliance ' with legislative enactment." |