Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

84 Wis. 532

State v. Harshaw

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided April 11, 1893

Wisconsin Supreme Court · decided 1893-04-11

APPEALS from the Circuit Court for Dane County. The opinion states the facts. contended, inter alia, that the finding and judgment cannot logically rest on the opinion filed by the trial court. If the dealings of the treasurer With the public funds were unlawful, his acts were never adopted or ratified by the state so as to entitle it to stand as principal in the contract and demand the fruits thereof.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 1925

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1893-04-11

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1' The following opinion was filed January 10, 1893:

LyoN, 0, J.

¶2There are two appeals in this action,— one by the defendant Henry B. Harshaw, and the other by all the remaining defendants. Such appeals are from the judgment of the circuit court in favor of the state and against all the defendants.

¶3The defendant Harshaw was state treasurer for the term commencing on the first Monday in January, 1889, and ending on the first Monday in January, 1891. The defendants Sawyer, Hay, McMillen, Porter, and Hooper, together with Charles B. Clark, now deceased, are the sureties in his official bond as such treasurer. The action is to recover interest paid by banks on deposits therein of the pub-*536lie funds made by Treasurer Harshaw in his name of office. It is like the case of State v. McFetridge, ante, p. 473, except that, instead of receiving the interest on such deposits himself, Treasurer Ilarshaw and his sureties, or some of them, secured the services of the defendant Schriber to collect and receive it. Schriber received over $62,000 of such interest, and deposited the same in the defendant The national Bank of Oshkosh, of which he was cashier, in the name of the defendant S. M. Hay, trustee. Hay is a surety in such bond, and the president of the defendant bank. The money still remains there on deposit. The action is in equity, for an accounting of such interest, and to reach such deposit in the defendant bank.

¶4The court held the defendant Harshaw and his sureties, liable for the amount of such interest, with interest thereon from the close of his official term, with costs. It also held defendant Schriber and the bank liable for the amount thus deposited, but not for interest thereon or costs. Judgment was entered for the state, accordingly, which provided that, when the amount of such deposit should be paid, the same should be applied upon the judgment against treasurer Harshaw and his sureties.

¶5In respect to the liability of the defendants Harshcm- and his sureties, the case is ruled by the McFetridge Case. There can be no doubt that the state is entitled to recover the interest realized on its funds, and deposited in the defendant bank by Schriber.

¶6By the Court.— The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed on both appeals.

PiNNey, J., took no part.

¶7A motion for a rehearing on the appeal of the defendants Sawyer and others Avas denied April 11, 1893. See the opinion, cante, p. 530.

/84/wis/532 · .json · Public domain