Page:North Dakota Reports (vol. 1).pdf/421

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.
TYLER v. CASS COUNTY.
397

should interfere by injunction to prevent a rightful act. But it often happens that, upon the record made, a certain act may be entirely rightful, and it may be the duty of the appropriate officer to perform such act, yet, by reason of matters dehors the record, its performance may be enjoined. A sheriff may have an execution in his hands which he is in duty bound to serve, but, by reason of matters dehors the record, the collection of the judgment on which the execution issued may be enjoined. Says Mr. Cooley: “The general rule is that such an officer (ministerial) is legally protected against any illegalities except those committed by himself, and it is not illegal for him to execute process that comes to him as a ministerial officer from other officers whose action he has no authority to revise or review. Indeed, if we are to judge by the weight of authority, it is more than doubtful if he has any right to do otherwise than to proceed with its execution, even though he may be satisfied that lying back of it are illegalities that would defeat the tax, and entitle one who should pay it to reimbursement.” Cooley, Tax’n, (2d Ed.) 798; Wall v. Trumbull, supra. Nor does the incident of costs furnish any criterion by which to gauge the character of the act. If the action were brought after the treasurer who made the sale had gone out of office, his successor would be a proper and necessary party defendant and judgment for costs might be rendered against such successor, but no wrongful act could be charged to him. But will the language of the statute bear the construction that respondent seeks to place upon it? A careful reading of the statute makes it clear to our minds that the legislature never intended to place any ultimate liability upon the counties. In every instance where the county is required to pay under the statute, “the treasurer and his sureties shall be liable to the county for the amount on his official bond;” or, in every case where liability arises under the statute, the party “‘may recover the same directly from the treasurer.” The treasurer and his bond are the ultimate sources of responsible liability; and, upon respondent’s theory, whenever lands are sold upon which no taxes are due, that liability arises. It matters not whether the sale occurred through the carelessness or mistake or willful act of the property owner in with-