The herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1893-1900, 1895-12-27
THE SUIT WAS PREMATURE
An Important Opinion in the
Matter of COnstabIe's Fees
THE ARBIOS CASE SETTLED
An Adverse Decision Given by the
Supreme Court
The Officer Was Too Quick in Going Into
Court-Business in the Departments of
the Superior Court

In view of the pending litigation in this
county over constable's fees, and the gen.
eral interest felt in the matter by
constables all over the state, an
opinion by the supreme court in the
case of Constable Arbios of San Ber-
nardino against that county. received at
the office of the deputy clerk in this city
yesterday, is of especial interest. The
opinion is written by Justice Harrison and
is concurred in by Justices Garoutte and
Van Fleet, and is given in it IS entirety as
follows:
The plaintiff is constable of one of the
townships in the county of San Bernar-
dino and on the 9th of May, 1894, filed
with the clerk of the board of supervisors
of that county and presented his claim for
1888. 40, properly itemized and verified,
for services rendered by him as said con-
stable. The board of supervisors, at its
meeting or the ! lth of August, allowed
claim for $l9S.99, whereupon the plaintiff
commenced the present action to recover
the full amount of his claim. demurrer
to the complaint was sustained by the
court, and from the Judgment entored
thereon this appeal is taken. The contro.
verified question on this appeal is whether
the plaintiff was authorized to bring an
action upon the claim until after the SUI
pervisors had acted thereon upon being in
formed of his unwillingness to accept
the amount allowed. Section 43 of the
county government act (statutes OF 1898,
page 364), after providing that the board
of supervisors may allow a portion of a
claim presented, provides: ''If the claim
ant is unwilling to receive such amount in
full payment the claim may again be con-
sidered at the next regular succeeding ses-
- - @arl lN,tt fnFf II ~
and section A provides: "A claimant
dissatisfied with the rejection of his claim
or demand, or with the amour: allowed
him on his account. may sue the county
therefor at any time within six months
after the final action OF the board, but not
afterwards" This provision in section Al,
limiting his right to sue the county to six
months after its ''final action" upon his
claim, implies that the board is 10 act
more than once thereon, and its "tiDal ac-
ton" is that which in the concluding
portion of section 43 is directed to be
taken when it has again considered the
claim after learning that the claimant is
dissatisfied with his prior action. The ST.
pervisors would not know whether the
claimant would be willing to accept the
amount allowed unless he should in some
way indicate his disposition, and until they
we're informed of his unwillingness there
would be no occasion for them to again
consider the claim.
The statutes requiring the presentation of
claims against a county are framed with
the purpose OF avoiding useless expense
and litigation, and to give the county
ample opportunity TO avoid such expense;
and we therefore hold that proper con-
strnction of the concluding portion of Sec
ton 43 required the plaintiff to indicate to
the super .isors his unwiilingness to accept
the amount which they had allowed, and
give them an opportunity TO again consider
his claim. in order that the county might
have an opportunity TO avoid mourning the
cost of litigation, which by section Al
would be imposed upon it. if he should re-
cover judgment for more than the
amount for which the claim was allowed.
He was not authorized to bring suit upon
his claim until after they had again taken
action thereon. The judgment is affirmed.
The MorgaH-Preston Trust Settled
Late yesterday afternoon Judge Shaw
gave his decision in the case of George w.
Morgan vs. j. H. Preston ct al. A decree
settling the trustees final account was
signed and filed. Then, by stipulation of
all the parties, decree settling the trust
and distributing the trust property was
filed, and a decree confirming the same
was signed and filed, thus finally closing
the litigation.
Ino IactS cOnneCteu WltQ THIS case are
somewhat out of the ordinary. George W.
Morgan, a capitalist, became financially
embarrassed He had property worth at
least 100000, but it wal in bad shape,
and he was in fair way of losing every
thing. There was no question but what. if
properly handled, the estate would in time
pay out and leave handsome surplus.
Mr.. Morgan accordingly conveyed the
property IL trust 10 Mr.. Preston, with full
authority to act in the premises. Mir. Pres
ton was very successful i'll his work, and
soon brought order out of the chaos, and
in time saw his way clear to work out the
matter to a successful conclusion. In the
meantime, Mr.. Morgan apparently thought
that his trustee was making too good a
thing out of the transaction. and brought
suit to have the trust set aside and the
property re-conveyed to him. The matter
was heard at length before Judge Shaw,
who not only refused to set aside the trust,
but paid Mr.. Preston a very high compli-
ment for the manner in which he had adj
ministered Mr.. Morgan's affairs as trustee.
This ended the matter so far as litigation
was concerned. The parties in interest
continued in an amicable way to negotiate
a settlement. which was finally consum-
mated and confirmed yesterday.