The herald., 1895-08-24

Searls. and affirmed by Justices Harri-
was brought professedly Under section
1919 added to the political code in 1898 for
the recovery of alleged illegal taxes paid
by plaintiff under protest. 1t is stated
in the com plant that the taxes com plain
ed of were levied by tho supervisors ''as
for special school tax for the city of
San Deigo school district The ile-
gality alleged is that the question whether
such tax should be raised was not SUBJ
mitted to vote of the electors of the
district as required by sections 1S30-35 of
to the complaint upon the special ground
among others, that the taxes paid by
plaintiff ''are neither county nor state
taxes. nor any taxes under the control
of I'll defendant" The court overruled
the demurrer and defendant answered,
alleging that tho levy was made pursu-
ant to a certain Judgment obtained by
said school district, which became final
on appeal to this court. The court sus-
tanned demurrer to the answer and rem
,, dered Judgment for plaintiff. from which
an appeal was taken. Tho court holds
, that the funds of school district are not
subject to the control of the county so as
to allow q REIN bursement of the county
for the amount of the judgment if it
should be paid. and if section 1919 of the
political code admits of a construction
which would uphold an action of this
kind, its constitutionality in that par
ticuar would admit of debate. for the
credit of a county cannot be pledged for
toe payment of the Liabilities of munich
pal or other corporations.
In the case of William Frisbie Lewis,
appellant, VS.. G. S. Chamberlain set al,
defendants. and r. W. Morse and V. H.
Conklin, respondents, an appeal from an
order dismissing proceedings supple
mentary to execution, the order dism S.
ing the proceedings is affirmed. The
opinion is by Commissioner Haynes, con-
Cured in by Conn issioners Searls and
Vancliet, and affirmed by Justices Har-
rison. Garoutte and Van Fleet. This
case is also from San Diego county, where
Lewis obtained Judgment in the superior
court for large amount of money, upon
which execution was issued and returned
nulla bona. Lewis afterward filed an
affidavit alleging on information and be-
lief that Conklin, for the purpose of evad-
ing payment of said Judgment, had con-
veyed large amount OF property to his
wife ana son, as well as other parties. and
asked that an order be issued recurring
the parties in interest to appear and be
examined as to their property, etc. The
court is of the opinion that IL ) order could
be legally made requiring the parties to
surrender the property mentioned in the
affidavit of plaintiff, and its application
in satisfaction of his Judgment otherwise
than upon their admission tnat it was the
property Of the Judgment debtor. To
make such an order in relation to prop
erty which they claimed to own in their
own right, if it could have any effect or
operation. would be to deprive them of
their property upon a summary proceed
ing and without due process of law.
In the case of d. S. Mccullough ct al,
respondents, vs. 1. p: Olds ct al. de-
PENDANTS, and l.. E. Olds, appellant, an
action to quiet title to certain lots in the
city of San Diego and lands in San Diego
county, the order appealed from is
affirmed. The opinion is by Commits
sioner Belcher, concnrred in by Commits
by Justices Harrison, Garoutte and Van
Fleet. All the defendants except appel
lanr disclaimed any interest in the lots.