Attorney General Opinions and Advisory Letters

Decision Information

Citations - New Mexico Appellate Reports
State ex rel. Garcia v. Board of Comm'rs - cited by 118 documents

Decision Content

Opinion No. 17-1910

January 5, 1917

BY: H. L. PATTON, Attorney General

TO: Hon. A. G. Whittier, State Traveling Auditor, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

District Court May Pay Deputy Clerk From Court Fund.

OPINION

Your letter of recent date asking for an opinion on the subject herein discussed is at hand and the contents noted. The facts stated by your letter disclose that, since the passage of Chap. 12, Laws 1915, known as the Salary Act, the County Clerk of Sandoval County has received compensation for the discharge of duties as Clerk of the District Court of said county in the amount prescribed by said act for counties of that class. It further appears that Mr. T. K. D. Maddison, of Albuquerque, acting under the authority of the District Judge of the district, assumed and discharged the duties of Clerk of the Court during a part of the same period and that he has been paid out of the court fund for one year's service at the rate of $ 50.00 per month amounting to $ 600.00.

The question of the right of the clerk to receive compensation for this service is involved. Under Art. 6, Sec. 22 of the State Constitution, it is provided that County Clerks shall perform the duties of the District Court. Under Sec. 2 of the Salary Act provision is made for the payment of additional compensation to County Clerks for the performance of the duties of the Clerks of the District Court in the various counties according to their classification. In the same section and in this connection appears the following language: "Such amounts shall be payable only to the deputy performing such services." In the case of State ex rel. Garcia v. Board of Commissioners, 21 N.M. 632, our Supreme Court in its opinion at page 648, quotes the language of the act which I have quoted, and while not directly pasing upon this identical question, strongly indicates that payment should be made only to the deputy performing the services. The services as clerk of the Court were not performed by a deputy appointed by the County Clerk. In my opinion, the compensation fixed by the Salary Act was payable to only such deputy. It follows that payment should not have been made to the County Clerk and that he should be required to return the amount paid to him.

Section 1369, Code 1915, provides for the creation and disbursement of the court fund. The disbursement of this fund is safeguarded to the extent that the county treasurer shall make payments therefrom only upon the certificate of the clerk of the court that an allowance has been made by the court. The only restriction upon the authority of the court is that no certificate shall be issued unless there is sufficient money in the fund to meet the same. The court fund is under the absolute control of the court. In my opinion the purposes for which this fund is disbursed are not proper subjects of inquiry from your department. Again since this payment was not made pursuant to the provisions of the Salary Act, the amount paid does not have to conform thereto.

1916

16-1904

16-1902

16-1901

16-1900

16-1899 1/2

16-1899

16-1898

16-1896

16-1895

16-1894

16-1890

16-1889

16-1887

16-1886

16-1885 1/2

16-1885

16-1882

16-1881

16-1880

16-1878

16-1877

16-1875

16-1874

16-1873

16-1871

16-1870

16-1869

16-1868

16-1867

16-1866

16-1865

16-1864

16-1861

16-1859 1/2

16-1857

16-1856

16-3902

16-1855

16-1854

16-1853

16-1850

16-1849

16-1848

16-1846

16-1845

16-1844

16-1843

16-1842

16-1841

16-1837

16-1836

16-1835

16-1834

16-1833

16-1832

16-1831

16-1830

16-1829

16-1827

16-1825

16-1824

16-1823

16-1822

16-1819

16-1818

16-1816

16-1814

16-1813

16-1812

16-1811

16-1810

16-1809 1/2

16-1809

16-1807

16-1806

16-1805

16-1804

16-1803

16-1799

16-1797

16-1795

16-1792

16-1791

16-1790

16-1787

16-1786

16-1785

16-1783 1/2

16-1783

16-1782

16-1781

16-1780

16-1779

16-1778

16-1777

16-1776

16-1775

16-1774

16-1773

16-1772

16-1769

16-1768

16-1767

16-1770

16-1766

16-1764

16-1953

16-1763

16-1762

16-1761

16-1760

16-1759

16-1758

16-1757

16-1756

16-1755

16-1754

16-1751

16-1750

16-1749

16-1748

16-1747

16-1746

16-1745

16-1744

16-1742

16-1741

16-1740

16-1738

16-1737

16-1736

16-1735

16-1734

16-1733

16-1732

16-1731

16-1730

16-1729

16-1728

16-1725

16-1724

16-1723

16-1722

16-1721

16-1720

16-1719

16-1718

16-1717

16-1716

16-1715

16-1714

16-1713

16-1712

16-1711

16-1710

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.