Montana Attorney General Opinion 15-310

Opinion No. 310 Appropriations--Claims-Biennium -State Officers. HELD: Claims for services rendered or expenses incurred prior to the close of the biennium may be presented and "hould be allowed even though pre- sented after July 1 of the new bi- ennium. August 18, 1933. This question has been submitted to this office for our opinion: "May claims incurred prior to July 1 against the Stllte of Montana be presented and al- lowed eyen after July 1st of new bi- ennium?" Section 304 H. C~ :\1. 1H:!1 provides as follows: "All moneys now or hereafter appro- prill ted for any specific purpose, shall. after the expiration of the time for which so appropriated be covel'eel bllck into the several funds from which oril\'il1all~' apPl'opria'ted : provided, . howE.>ver, that any unexpended bal- /lnce in any specific appropriation may be used ·for either of said years for which such appropriation has been made." "Unless expressly so provided, it is !lot necessary that the mOlley approp- riated should be actually applied for or drawn from the treasury during the time limited, and a like rule prevails where statutes make the appropria- tion available for a deSignated and limited period of time only. More- over, the expres~-ed time limitation does not put an end to an appropria- tion, in so far as claims have matured and warrants been issued therefor prior to the expiration of such time, merely hecause the designated period 210 OPIKIOXS OF THE ATTORXEY GENERAL expires before the funds appropriated have been or will have been collected." 59 O .. T. 259, sec. 397. "This section means simply this: that pro\'ision for the support of the Government by anyone legislature must be limited to two years. It does not require the money appropriated to be actuaJly drawn from the treasury during that time, but the expense must be incurred or the salary earned, dur- ing the two years for which the ap- propriation is made." Opinion of the Judges, 5 Neb. 566. "Under the constitutional prm'isions as to the ending of appropriations with the expiration of the first fisc-al quar- ter after the adjournment of the next regular session of the legislature * * * it is not essential that the money be actually (lrawn dming the two year period, but the expense must have been incurred during too two years for which the appropriation is maoo/' State ex reI. Ledwith Y. Brian, 120 N. W. 916, 84 Neb. 30. "While the authority to incur ex- penses during each fiscal year was lim- ited to the sum named in the statute. the actual paympnt of those expenses: the issuance of warrants, was not re- stricted by the statute to the fiscal ~'ear in which the service is rendere<l or the expense incurred; though .... payment could not be made unless there was . . . . an unexpended balance in the appropriation for the fiscal year !luring which the expense was incurred. 'J'he ba ses of the limitation in our stat- ute are the fiscal year and the maxi- mum sum prescribed for expenses dur- ing the fiscal yea 1'; and the limitation is not restricti ye of the time of pay- ment for services rendered." Allgood y. Stallings, 72 So. 383, 197 Ala. 121. To the same effect are People v. Lip- pincott, 72 Ill. 578; Irion v. Oonner, 128 So. 37, 170 La. 435; Benedict v. New Orleans, 39 So. 792, 115 La. 646; 11Ild Maryland Agricultural College y. Atkinson, 62 A. 1035. 102 j'IId. 557. In :\Idfullen v. Zouck, 100 A. 728, 130 Md. 541. it was held that failure to file statement of outstanding claims against the appropriations, by the body for whom it has been appropriated, at the end of the time limitation specified in the act does not aIter the operation of the rule stated in the first paragraph of this discussion. We saw no cases to the contrarY. From the rule laid down in the above authorities, it follows that e\aims for services rendered or expenses incurred prior to the close of the biennium may be presented and should be allowecl eyen though presented after .Tul~' 1st of the new biennium.