Case ID: okla_104/html/0262-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "STEPHENSON. C.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

BOARD OF COM’RS OF TULSA COUNTY v. CO-OPERATIVE PUBLISHING CO.
    No. 13632
    Opinion Filed April 8, 1924.
    Rehearing Denied Dec. 9, 1924.
    1. Counties — Purchase of Office Supplies— Authority of Board of Commissioners.
    The statute has designated the board of county commissioners as the agent to purchase the necessary supplies for the use of other county officers in the performance of their official duties.
    2. Same — Nondeliegable Duty of Board.
    , The statute does not grant to the board of county commissioners the power to delegate this duty to some other person.
    3. Same — Statutory Authority for Contacts. .
    The plaintiff is not entitled to recover on a claim or contract against the county, unless it can be shown that the contract rests on some express or implied provision of the law.
    4. Same — Contact by County Clerk — Invalidity.
    The contract sued on in this case was made between the plaintiff and the county clerk of Tulsa county, as the result of a pri- or board of county commissioners making the county clerk the purchasing agent for the board. Held, the contract is null and void.
    5. Same — County Not Estopped to Repudiate Contract.
    Equitable estoppel is noit available to the plaintiff in an action against a county based on an unlawful contract entered into between the plaintiff and an officer of the county, who had no authority to act in the purchase of the supplies.
    (Syllabus by Stephenson, C.)
    Commissioners’ Opinion, Division No. 4.
    Error from District Court, Tulsa County; Redmond S. Cole, Judge.
    Action- by Co-Operative Publishing Company against the Board of County Commissioners of Tulsa County for debt. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.
    Reversed and remanded, with directions.
    John M. Goldesberry, Co. Atty.,- and James Harrington, Asst. Co. Atty., for plaintiff in error.
    Ward & Chase and Geo. Paschal, for defendant in error.
   Opinion by

STEPHENSON. C.

Board of County Commissioners of Tulsa County v. News-Dispatch- Print. & Audit Company, No. 13940-, this day decided, controls this appeal and results in tile reversal and remanding of this cause for further proceedings in accordance with the views therein expressed.

Therefore, it is recommended that this cause be reversed and remanded, with directions to dismiss the plaintiff’s action.

By the Court: It is so ordered.