Montana Attorney General Opinion 15-125

Opinion No. 125 Fish and Game-Stat.e Game Warden- Deputies-Expenses-..Claims. HELD: If expense claims are au- thorized by the Fish and Game Com- mission, and expenditures are nece~­ sarily incurred, the fact that repair hills are allowed in addition to a de- preciation charge of $15.00 per month will not render such repair claims in- valid. Claims for storage of a car when such car is at base of operations are properly disaHowed. Additional allowances for special work, which are properly approved, lllay he allowed. March 28, 1933. You have requested my opinion rela- th'e to expense accounts of deputies in your office. Section 3661, It. C. M. 1!)21, as amended by Chapter 59, Laws of 1927, pro\·icl~s in part: "EilCh depu- ty 'State fish and game warden shall be allowed his actual and necessary traveling expenses while away from his place of residence upon official husiness connected with his office, not· OPIXIOl'\S OF THE ATTORi-iEY GENERAL 95 exceeding the sum of Six Hundred Dollars ($600.00) per year, unless spe- dal work shall be ordered by the fish and game commission; said expenses to he al)pro\'ed by said state fish and gallIe wa rden and to be paid upon prop- er youchers from the state fish and galue fund". It appeal'S that the State Fish and Game Commission has authorized nn expell(liture for expenses of not in ex- cess of $50.00 per month or $600.00 per renr; nnd has nuthorized the pnyment of $15.00 per month for depreCiation on cars allll the l)ayment for license plates and repairs on cars. The law limits the expenditures under certain conditions and authori7.es additionnl expenditures for expenses when neces- sary and authorized by the State Fish and Game Commission. 'Vhen such expenditures are llroperly authori7.ed and made, they constitute valid claims and should be paid. The fact that $15.00 per month is a llowed for depre- ciation wHI not prevent the allowance of repair bills as same ;ne clearly au- thorized by the minutes of the board February 9, 1933. '1'he allowance of expenses, sa\'e as limited by law, is dearly left with the State Fish and Game Commission. It aI1pears to me that the commi,,- sion is not exactly following the lettel' and spirit of the law. The law pro- yides for expenses of each deputy not in excess of $600.00 per year. When the expenses of a deputy reaches $600.- 00 in one year, the State Game "'arden should make an order authorizing the expenditure of such additional ex- penses as he deems right and prOI>cr under the statute quoted. Answering your specific questions: 1. If authorized by the board and necessarily expended, the fact that re- (lair hills are allowed in addition to a depreciation charge of $15.00 per month will not render such repair daims im·alid. 2. The law specifieallr sl'ates that expenses are allowed to a deputy "while away from his place of resi- dence". It would appear that portion of the statute would forbid claims for storage of a car when such car is at base. 3. As the statute pro \"ides tha t in case of special work. such additional pXl>enses lIIay be allowed as shall be appro\'ed by the State Ji'ish and Game Warden. rou are undoubtedly author- iZl'd to make additional allowanees for !<pecial work. Opinion No, 126 COI-pora.tions--Powers--Pal-t·mrships. Hl,}LD: Unless su authorized by its charter or by statute, a corpol'lltion has no implied power to enter into a part- 1H'I'ship agreement. March 29, 1933. You have suhmitted articles of in- corporation which authorize a corpora- tion to enter into a partnership agree- mpnt together with a letter from At- tol'lH'Y Genera I Foot ad\'ising ~'O\l tha t a rticles of incorporation should not contain such a pro\'ision. (Vol. 14. Opinions of Attomey Genpral, page ~58). W'e have in\'estignted the authorities suhmitted by the Attorney General and counsel and would agree with the opin- ion rpached h~' Attorney Genprnl Foot. A quotation from Ruling Case Law contained in his opinion may refer par· ticularl~' to implied powers. The quo- ta tion from Fletcher's Cyclopedia on COI'J)()rations: "The rule that a cor- llol'lltion cannot enter into a contract of partnership does not apply when "nch contract is expressly authorized lIy its cha rter as it ma~' be." (Sec. 843,. 1917 Edition), and citations gh'en would constitute a sufficient contl'll- (lictory authority sa\'e that the rule laid down in Fletcher's Cyclopedia on Corporations, Permanent Edition, mod- ifies the ahove quotation. "It is fairly well settled that cor- porations cannot ordinar1ly enter into lllll·tnerships with other corI1orations 01' with individuals for in entel;ng into a partnership the identity of the corporation is lost or merged with that of another amI the direction of the uffah's is plaeed in other hands than those provided hy the law of its ('rea tion. A cOl'I10rn tion can act only through its duly authorized officers and agents and is not bound by the acts of anyone else while in a part- nership each member binds the firm