Opinion
No. C-644
Decided December 22, 1975.
In an action filed by district attorney trial court entered judgment in his favor ordering the county commissioners to pay their proportionate share of salaries of part-time deputy district attorneys on a pro rata basis with other counties in the district, and commissioners appeal. The Court of Appeals reversed, 35 Colo. App. 108, 532 P.2d 971, and certiorari was granted.
Petition for Writ of Certiorari Dismissed
1. PROSECUTING ATTORNEYS — Part-Time Deputies — Method of Compensation — Statute — Moot — Salary Payments. Petition for writ of certiorari concerning interpretation of statute governing the method of compensation of part-time deputy district attorneys is dismissed in view of the 1975 legislature's enactment of new statute; hence, interpretations of statute in question — by supreme court, or interpretation by court of appeals which was to take effect prospectively — have been rendered moot; nevertheless, salary payments to deputies are to be made to date in conformity with district court judgment.
Certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals
Doyle T. Johns, Jr., District Attorney, pro se.
R. C. Stephenson, County Attorney, Hurth, Yeager Sisk, John M. Yeager, for respondents.
Michael C. Stern, for Colorado District Attorneys Association, amicus curiae.
We granted certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals to review the decision of that court upholding the position of the County Commissioners of Yuma County in a salary dispute with the district attorney, Johns, (petitioner here). Johns v. Powell, 35 Colo. App. 108, 532 P.2d 971 (1974).
[1] The trial court in the action filed by district attorney Johns entered judgment in his favor, ordering the county commissioners to pay their proportionate share of the salaries of the part-time deputy district attorneys on a pro rata basis with other counties in the district. The court of appeals reversed, holding that 1971 Perm. Supp., C.R.S. 1963, 45-3-3(1) and (2), unambiguously provided that only the salaries of full-time deputies are to be assessed against the counties in proportion to the population each county bears to the whole population of the judicial district.
It now appears from the record and the statements of the parties that the disputed payments were made by the county in the year 1973 when suit was brought. In the subsequent years of 1974 and 1975, while this matter has been pending in both the court of appeals and here, a district court order to the county commissioners to pay their proportionate share of the salaries has been in effect and has not been stayed. Under that order the payments for both of those years either have been made or should have been, and if they were not made, it is hereby ordered that they be brought up to date in conformance with the district court judgment.
Additionally the resolution of the dispute by the court of appeals and the interpretation of the statute was ordered to take effect prospectively and not to become effective until after the mandate which has been stayed while the matter has been in this court.
The year 1975 is now drawing to a close, and in the meantime during the 1975 session of the legislature the statute under dispute was repealed and a new statute was enacted governing compensation of part-time deputy district attorneys for the future. Colo. Sess. Laws 1975, ch. 178, 20-1-203 at 657. The interpretation of the new statute and method of payment of salaries of part-time deputies under it is not before us. If another controversy arises under the new law, we leave its resolution for another day.
Under the circumstances, an interpretation of the statute in question by us or the interpretation by the court of appeals which was to take effect prospectively have been rendered moot.
Accordingly the petition for writ of certiorari is dismissed.