Edelmann v. Board of Com'rs, Leflore Co.

3 Citing cases

  1. Western Chem. v. Board of Com'rs, Pottawatomie Co.

    44 P.2d 825 (Okla. 1935)   Cited 2 times

    The board of county commissioners is designated purchasing agent of the county by statute. Section 5793, C. O. S. 1921. It alone is authorized to enter into contracts for and in behalf of the county. Board of County Com'rs of Tulsa County v. Tulsa Camera Record Co., 103 Okla. 35, 228 P. 1103; Edelmann v. Bd. of Com'rs of Le Flore County, 110 Okla. 172, 237 P. 94; News-Dispatch Ptg. Co. v. Le Flore County, 112 Okla. 138, 240 P. 64."

  2. Bd. of Com'rs, Adair Cty. v. Morris Disinfecting Co.

    299 P. 431 (Okla. 1931)   Cited 1 times

    The board of county commissioners is designated purchasing agent of the county by statute. Section 5793, C. O. S. 1921. It alone is authorized to enter into contracts for and in behalf of the county. Tulsa County v. Tulsa Camera Record Co., 103 Okla. 35, 228 P. 1103; Edelman v. Bd. of Com'rs of LeFlore County, 110 Okla. 172, 257 P. 94; News-Dispatch Ptg. Co. v. LeFlore County, 112 Okla. 138, 240 P. 64. The judgment is erroneous for another reason.

  3. Bd. of Com'rs of Delaware Co. v. News-Dispatch

    251 P. 1118 (Okla. 1926)

    The question involved here, to wit, whether the company is entitled to recover the purchase price for the goods purchased by the individual county officers, has been definitely settled by former recent decisions of this court, and it is our conclusion, following the doctrine there laid down, that the plaintiff below was not entitled to recover on these claims or contracts against the county, unless it can be shown that the contracts rest on some express or implied provisions of law. Edelmann v. Board of Com'rs of LeFlore County, 110 Okla. 172, 237 P. 94; News-Dispatch Printing Audit Co. v. Board of Com'rs, 112 Okla. 138, 240 P. 64. Section 5793, Comp. Stats. 1921, expressly authorizes the board of county commissioners to provide, and charges them with the duty of furnishing, the necessary supplies to the various county officers and it has heretofore been held by this court that this duty cannot be delegated to some other officer or person as was apparently attempted to be done in this case.