'ARic1] LYONS MACEfINERY CO: V: PIKE ; COUNTYY 531 ;;;;• LYON ' S' MACHINERr'COMPANY V. PIKE •CdUNTY'..; •• - • .,• • . ' .4-4247' Opinion delivered March: 30, 1936:: coiffilyrEs.N.3 . 4 • • aiithOrity or : power is • COi-iferied * . upOn - 'county ;judges- by the Conatitution or : by statute to : make :contracts • on • : : behalf . of ,coUnty.; , but such authority- . or • .power is• conferred upon county courts. • - • . • - • • . 'CouNT , i4. 1\io . recoyer. y , can be had against county for the lia.ue ° Of coacrefe culrert forms furnished undei a contraCt. With the ' eOurity judge • Where no ordei Or . judgment' Of '.'COUnty court had • been • enteted appiOving 'same ; and • Wiiere : the :county Made : nO Use • . of, nOr laid :any• 'claim to, : such , concrete .forms, though, they. were • .raceived,and . stored ,on , county property. • t : AtiPeal frein• Pike"Circuit Ceurf; AIP:Sfeet, Judge; 'affirmed. • • ' • ' ' ": Alfred Feath i erslon„for appellant. aPPelled. • ' •;• .• HuMPHREYS, J. This suit was commenced in the county court of Pike County by appellant .filing a verified account or . claim. against , said county in . the sum of $2,110 for-concrete . Culvert fOrnis. The claim was filed on April 1, 1935, with the county clerk, and was disallowed by the, county court , on the : same day; An appeal was taken to Ihe • 'circiiit . court 'Of Said COUnty from the judgment-of disallowance; where• the -cause Was subtaitted 'to the cthirt • Without the intervention of 'a jury,''resulting jUdgin erit .. disinis§jpg n,. rOm. which is :this appeal. , . • According to the undisputed evidence in•the instant -e-a.ge;''the-7contraet.foirthe-saie r'and-Parclia se =Of form§'was'entered'inte in Little'RoCk,''Ark-anSas, betWeen W., 'Mauney,.the county jn'elge:'0Pike County.,and appellant .. corporation . on, the .26th: ;day of .0ctober,• 1934, ,and no •order .or:judgment.•of.the..county court . was entered . approving the contract. • • • No authoritY 6r- poWer . is 'Conferred Upon- COunty ,judges .by:thei-Constitution or by statute ta :make contracts on behalf of the county. With certain limitation§, such•authority.or.power. iS Conferred by the ConStitution and statutes upon county. 'courts.,• Article WTI, § .28, Con-
532 [492 stitution of 1874; Amendment No. 10 to the Constitution of 1874; §§ 1976 and 2279 of Crawford & Moses' Digest. Rebsamen, Brown & Co. v. Vail?, Buren County, 177 Ark. 268, 6 S. W. (2d) 288. It is suggested by appellant that, even though the contract be held by the court to be invalid, it should be entitled to recover under the rule of quantum merwit. The argument is made that because Judge Mauney accepted the shipment and stored same on county property, the county is liable on a quantum merwit basis. This might be true if the county had made any use of the concrete forms in the construction of culverts, but it did not use them. The county has refused to use them, and makes no claim to them. In fact, it claims to have no use for them, and no money with which to buy concrete with which to build culverts. The judgment is affirmed, disallowing appellant's account or claim.
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.