Laserfiche WebLink
01/08/2007 09:32 FAX 651 223 4987 <br />01/09/2007 09:12 FAX 8512971235 <br />Mr. L. P. Blomholaa -- 3. <br />JENSEN BELL CONVERSE <br />Q 004/006 <br />ATTY GENERAL qt 007/009 <br />December 6, 19;4 <br />not apply to an agent unleis,hetha as been aot the <br />so to do. The authority g agents <br />school district is statutory and therefore open for <br />all to know, and in view of the well knows fiscal <br />policy of our laws, to the effect that the municipal <br />agents may expend such funds, or incur financial lie.• <br />batty, only as they are specifically or by reasonable <br />isplication so authorized, we must conclude that the <br />school directors have been given no *pacific or implied <br />authority s d* <br />wise the district acknowledge is not unequivocally bound <br />law to pay. <br />To hold otherwise than as here indicated would <br />result in permitting school directors at their will <br />to pay, or bring about the payment of certain claims, <br />and to deny others of equal station, which would sees <br />to result in unsound public policy and which nowhere <br />appears to have been intended from the powers granted <br />to the directors. Such power. sight tend to induce <br />fraud collusion and oppression and result in aidt- <br />ti'orial burdens upon taxpayers without their consent <br />and its * manner not provided for by law,' <br />Again, in the case of So£ints Canton Coil Co, v. 3uduatrial <br />, ommiee #on of Utah, 58 Utah 60$, 201 P. 173, 178, which amts i.e- ' <br />cited in and quote}; from in the Nordmen case, the court pointed out <br />that the right to Wave a statute of limitations is a personal one <br />and the person so waiving it acts in his•pereoaal capacity and in <br />hip on right. The court further pointed out that governmental <br />agents act as trustees and not in their own right. At pp. 292 -293 <br />(Nordman case), it is stateds <br />*To permit the Commission, or any other person <br />having control of that fund, to waive the atatute <br />of limitations at will must, in the long run, result <br />in injustice and favoritism since the statute can <br />be enforced as against A}�., and C., and an sassily <br />E <br />waived in favor of D., ., and F.;,,A person or corpor- <br />ation distributing his or its ores money may elect to <br />waive the benefit of the statute of limitations in <br />favor of A. while he or it may insist upon it as against <br />B. without abusing any trust or disregarding a public <br />duty, A public official may, however, not indulge in <br />5 <br />