Dillon v. Bicknell
Before: Haynes
Synopsis
District Attorney—Term of Office—Compensation for Holding Over— County Government Act—Repeal of Code Provision.—Section 4109 of the Political Code, limiting the term of office of certain county officers, including the district attorney, to the precise period of two years, was repealed by section 60 of the County Government Act, providing that all officers elected thereunder shall hold office until their successors are elected or appointed and qualified; and the district attorney is entitled to demand and receive compensation in proportion to his monthly salary for such part of a month as he may hold over, after the expiration of the term for which he was elected, until his successor has qualified.
Id.—Statutory Construction — Revision — Repeal by Implication.— Whenever it clearly appears that the intention of the legislature, by a later act, is to revise the entire subject matter of a former act, the subsequent act operates as a repeal of the former, although it contains no precise words to that effect; and even if the subsequent statute be not repugnant in all of its provisions to a prior one, yet, if the later statute was clearly intended to prescribe the only rule which should govern in the case provided for, it repeals the original act.
Id.—Construction of County Government Act—Pro Rata Compensation of Officers.—The County Government Act, though providing for warrants in favor of county officers for their salary, to be drawn on the first Monday of each and every month, contemplates that the warrant may be drawn for such fractional portion of a month as the officer may actually serve after the first Monday of January, with which his term ordinarily concludes.
Haynes, C. Plaintiff was elected district attorney of Los Angeles county at the general election in November, 1892, and entered upon his said office on the second day of January, 1893, that being the first Monday after the first day of January, and his term of office [112]expired on the seventh day of January, 1895, that being also the first Monday after the first day of January of that year. The salary was four thousand dollars per annum, and he received from the salary fund of the county eight thousand dollars, which was paid him in monthly installments of three hundred and thirty-three and one-third dollars per month, by warrants drawn by defendant upon the county treasurer, as provided by section 221 of the County Government Act of 1891. (Stats. 1891, p. 419.) Plaintiff, claiming that he served as district attorney five days more than two official years, demanded of the defendant, as such auditor, that he draw a warrant upon the county treasurer for his salary for said five days, amounting to fifty-four dollars and fifty cents. The auditor refused to issue said warrant, and the court below, upon the petition of the ■plaintiff, rendered judgment directing a peremptory writ of mandate to issue as prayed for by plaintiff, and from said judgment the defendant appeals.
Sec. 20, art. XX, of the constitution provides as follows: “ Elections of the officers provided for by the constitution, except at the election in the year 1879, shall be held on the even numbered years next before the expiration of their respective terms. Terms of such officers shall commence on the first Monday after the first day of January next following their election.”
Section 4109 of the Political Code, as amended March 7, 1881 (Stats. 1881, p. 72), is as follows: “All elective county, city, and township officers, except superior court judges, superintendents of schools, and assessors, shall be elected at the general election to be held in the year 1882, and at the general election to be held every second year thereafter, and shall take office on the first Monday after the first day of January next succeeding their election, and shall hold office for two years. The years that said officers are to hold office are to be computed respectively from and including the first Monday after the first day of January of any one year to and [113]
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)