50 CASES IN THE SUPREME COURT Brandenburg et al. vs. State, use of Monroe -County. IDEmonma BRANDENBURG ET AL. VS. STATE, USE OF MONROE COUNTY. The county court acts judicially in adjusting the accounts of an internal improvement commissioner, and has no power to set aside its judgment after the lapse of the term. Error to _Monroe Circuit Court. lion. GEORGE W. BEASLEY, Circuit Judgp. STILLWELL & WOODRUFF, for plaintiff. GARLAND & RANDOLPH, for 'defendant. Mr. Justice ComproN delivered the opinion of the court. The account of Brandenburg, one of the plaintiffs in error, as internal improvement commissioner, was audited in the county court of Monroe county, at October term, 1854, and the amount due from him to the county, for and on account of the internal improvement fund, ascertained to be $1,836.05. At a subsequent term of the same court, held in January, 1855, the settlement made at October term was, for error alleged, set aside, and the account of Bradenburg re-audited, showing a balance against,him of $1,551.31, which he was ordered to pay over, but failing to; do so, suit was brought on his official bond, and the only breach assigned in the declaration, is his failure to pay this latter sum,
OF THE STATE OF ARKANSAS. 51 TERM, 1862.] As a defence to the action, it was pleaded in bar by Branden-burg and his sureties, who were defendants below, that after the expiration of the term of the county court, held in October, 1854, the court had no power to set aside the settlement made at that term, and make another between the parties concerning the same subject matter ; and that, consequently, the action of the court at January term, 1855, was corm non judice and void, imposing no obligation whatever on Bradenburg to pay over the sum then found against him. This was a good defence. In the adjustment of Brandenburg's account, the county court acted judicially, and certainly had no power to set asiCle its judgment after the lapse of the term at which it was rendered. 1?eif et al. vs. Conner, 5 Eng., 241 ; Cossit vs. Biscoe, 7 Eng., 95 ; Brooks vs. Hanauer, 22 Ark., 174. The circuit court erred, therefore, in sustaining the demurrer to the sixth plea of the defendants, for which the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings. •04
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.