Maxwell v. Supervisors of Stanislaus County
Before: McKinstry
Synopsis
Appeal from a judgment for the plaintiff, in the Fifth District Court, County of Stanislaus. Booker, J.
The proceeding in the Court below was certiorari to the board of supervisors of Stanislaus County to annul a resolution of that board, for the publication of the proceedings of the board, and the reports, statements, and advertisements of the officers of the county, in the /Stanislaus County Weel&ly News; and for the execution of a contract with the proprietors of that journal for that purpose. The resolution was passed and the contract executed February 9th, 1878.
McKinstry, J.: The question of the power of the board to pass the resolutions recited in the complaint, and to enter into the contract with J. D. Spencer, a copy whereof is attached to the complaint, is made to turn, in the points of counsel, upon § 4047 of the Political Code, as the same was enacted April 1st, 1878. That section réads as follows:
“ The supervisors must contract for—
“First.—All county printing.
“Second.—All books and stationery.
“Third.—All supplies for county institutions.
“And all the contracts must be made with the lowest bidder, and after ten days’ public notice that such contract will be let. The bidding must be by sealed proposals.” (Amend. Pol. Code, 1877-78, p. 690
On the one hand, it has been argued that the section just quoted did not apply to arrangements or contracts made for the “ publication ” of the proceedings of the board, etc.; on the other, that by reason of the section no contract could be made for any kind of county printing, except upon notice and bids therein provided for; and that a contract to publish in a newspaper includes “ printing.”
We do not understand it to be claimed by respondent that the Board were without authority to pass the resolutions, or make the contract with Spencer, unless the section of the Political Code above cited operated a limitation upon their power.
The resolutions providing for the contract were passed, and the contract was executed on the ninth day of February, 1878. The amendment, § 4047 of the Political Code, which, as is claimed, prohibited the contract, was passed and took effect April 1st, 1878.
Our attention has not been called to any provision of the [116]codes or other statutes which was in operation when the resolutions were passed and the contract executed, and which operated a limitation upon the general powers of the Board “ to contract for the county printing, and provide books and stationery for the county officers,” and “ to cause to be published at the adjournment of each session, in a newspaper or otherwise, a fair statement of all their proceedings, and semi-annually a statement of the financial condition of the county.” (Pol. Code, § 4046, subd. 2122.)
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)