Shoshone journal. [volume] (Shoshone, Idaho) 1884-1931, 1910-01-21
sHosHoNE LINCOLN COUNTY, IDAHO FRIDAY JANUARY H. 1910

statute further provides that upon
such appeal being taken, the Clerk of
the Board of County Commissioners
must forward to the Qktrict Judge a
copy of the proceedings s'appealed from.
together with the papers connected
with the appeal within five days from
the time of appeal, and the District
Judge shall proceed to hearsuch matter
appealed from in a summary manner
and need not wait until the convening
I the regular term of the District Court,
but it may be heard any time and that
the matter appealed from shall be
heard anew by the District Judge.
With these well known provisions of
our statutes in mind, cannot avoid
the conclusion that the plaintiff above
named and those whom he represents
had plain, speedy and. adequate re-
medy at law by appeal and should have
adopted in due time that process.
The Supreme Court of this State has
said in the very recent case of School
District No. 25 vs.. Rice, II Ida; p. SO,
in reversing the District Court, in SUBJ
stance. that:
The remedy for review of the action
of Board of County Commissioners in
this State is by appeal from the order
or act complained of, and that equi-
table relief will not be granted where
there is plain, speedy and adequate
remedy by appeal provided.
And again in Morgan VS.. County
Commissioners, Ida.; 41s, in revers-
ing the District Court, our Supreme
Court announces that:
"The remedy to correct errors and
Irregularities in the oction of Board
of County Commissioners, acting in a
matter over which said Board has jur-
isdiction, is solely by appeal"
Our Appellate Court has again said,
in reversing the action of the District
Court, in the case of Rogers VS.. Hays
ct al, e Ida 597,) that:
Writ of review does not lie from the
action of Board of County Commissi-
oners, the statute having provided a
speedy and adequateremedy by appeal. "
In the case of Wright VS.. Kelley ct
al, "a Ida.; 6 A. the Supreme Court of
this State says in the syllabus, which
is by the Court, that:
''Writ of mandate will not issue
,.ybara +I,ara ;S q pleip cnaadxr ard
adequate remedy at law"
In the case of Picotte VS.. Watt, e
Ida; 440, it is again said by our Su-
preme Court;
''But it is urged by plaintiff that to
have taken an appeal in each of the
causes enumerated in the complaint
would have subjected him to great
trouble and inconvenience. This may
be unfortunate for plaintiff and those
he represents but it furnishes no ex-
cuse for the Court to set aside a rule
so generally recognized, and repeatedly
iterated by this Court, as that equity !
may not be invoked where the party |
has a complete and adequate remedy |
at law"
In the case of Corker VS.. Commits
sioners of Elmore County, Q0 Ida; 255) |
our State Supreme Court announces,
in reversing the action of the District
Court, that:
From the action of the Board in
awarding a contract, any person aggri-
eyed thereby or any tax payers of the
county, may appeal to the District
Court, and if no appeal is taken with
in the statutory time, the order is final
and can no longer be questioned. "
From the above decisions, it will be
noted that the Supreme Court of this
State has had occasion frequently to
reverse the District Court because of
their failure to require litigants to
observe that the statute provides an
appeal from the order of the Board of
County Commissioners in all matters,
and that other remedies or actions
shall not be invoked if the appeal will
provides remedy which is plain, speedy
and adequate.
pages and omitted.)
EDWARD A. WALTERS,