The Arizona sentinel. [volume] (Arizona City [Yuma], Yuma County, A.T. [Ariz.]) 1872-1911, 1910-03-10
Suits Against
Supervisors and
Other Parties

G. T. Willis, in his report made
a month ago after inspecting the
Yuma county records, District
Attorney w F. Timmons has
filed in the Justices court two
suits and in the district court
three suits against the Yuma
county board Of supervisors
w. E. Marvin, j. II. Shanssey
and A. Il. Kent-their bonds
men, and other parties varying
in each action, to recover certain
sums of money aggregating
S2,O55, held by Examiner Willis
to have. been paid out on claims
not allowable under the statutes
Of Arizona. Twenty per cent
penalty is added to the amounts
Of these claims, which are in
severalty as follows:
Suit in the Justices court
against the board Of supervisors,
their bondsmen and G. Il. Moore
for $500. This amount was
paid Mr.. Moore for making up
list of real estate subject to tax
alton in road district No. l The
expert said this work should
have been done by the assessors
Office and therefore was not a
legal demand against the county,
Suit in Justices court against
the board of supervisors and B.
L. Meeden for SlGO. This de
mand was for salary as deputy
assessor for the month of July,
1909. AS Yuma county was not
a first class county at this time,
the expert reported the claim as
illegal.
One suit in the district court
is against the board Of supervis-
ors and c. II. Moore for $500 for
salary as deputy assessor for
April, May and June. 1909. AS
Yuma county was not "a first
class county at that time, the
expert held that this claim was
an illegal demand.
A second suit in district court
is against the board of supervls-
ors and Yuma Title Abstract
Company for the sum Of 1925 for
making changes on plats for
assessors Office. The expert
held that this work must be done
oy the assessors office without
additional charges to the county.
The last suit in the district
court is against the board of
supervisors and E. +. Sanguin-
ETH and involves the payment of
the sum OF 81, 200 which Mr..
Sanguinetti advanced for the
repair and strengthening of the
Gila river levee. The expert
held chat the claim was an illegal
one.
The statute under which the
district attorney is operating is
as follows:
''Par. 955 (Sec. 28), Revised
Statutes. 3 II = Wherever
any board of supervisors shall,
without authority of law, order
any money paid out of the county
treasury for salary, fees, or for
any other purpose, such SUPER
visors and the party or parties
in whose favor such order shall
have been made shall be respon-
sible for all sach sums Of money
and twenty per cent additional
thereon, to be recovered as fol
lows: The district attorney of
such county is hereby empower
ed and it is hereby made his duty
to institute suit in the name of
Lis county against such super
viSors and Others or any number
OF them, to eniOin the payment
Of such money (or in case the
same shall have been paid, then
to recover the Same(, with twenty
per cent and lawful interest and
costs, which shall be covered in
10 the county treasury to the
credit Of the fund from which
the order of allowance was made
and the court shall give iudg-
ment accordingly, and for inter-
est and costs, as in other cases"
As will be seen by the above,
the supervisors are made the
principals in the suits. mas
much as most if not all of the
amounts involved were paid out