Court Opinion

ID: 3788796
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-07-06 07:37:29.726966+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:23:26.916175
License: Public Domain

OPINION — AG — ** COURT CLERK — APPROPRIATION — DUAL POSITION — SALARY ** SO LONG AS THE 1943 GENERAL COUNTY SALARY ACT (19 O.S. 180.1 [19-180.1] ET SEQ.) IS APPLICABLE TO THE OFFICE OF COUNTY JUDGE OF A COUNTY WITHIN ONE OF THE POPULATION VALUATION GROUPS OF COUNTIES COVERED BY SECT. 15 OF SAID 1943 ACT, THE COUNTY JUDGE OF SUCH COUNTY IS 'WITHOUT' AUTHORITY TO APPOINT A COURT STENOGRAPHER OR ANY OTHER EMPLOYEE; AND THAT, THEREFORE, WOULD BE NO AUTHORITY IN LAW FOR THE PAYMENT, FROM ANY PUBLIC FUNDS, OF ANY SALARY TO A PERSON SO APPOINTED. (COUNTY APPROPRIATION, POSITION, COURT CLERK, APPOINTMENT, COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, COUNTY EXCISE BOARD) CITE: 19 O.S. 180.48 [19-180.48] 20 O.S. 311 [20-311], 19 O.S. 222 [19-222], 20 O.S. 314 [20-314] [20-314], 20 O.S. 312 [20-312], 19 O.S. 180.18 [19-180.18] [19-180.18], 19 O.S. 179.11 [19-179.11], OPINION NO. JANUARY 19, 1949 — DUKE, OPINION NO. JULY 8, 1950 — ROWE (JAMES C. HARKIN)