
    HUGHES v. MENDOCINO COUNTY.
    No. 8155;
    June 28, 1884.
    4 Pac. 236.
    Ees Adjudicate—Judgment on Claim Rejected by Board of Supervisors.—Each claim presented to and rejected by a board of supervisors constitutes a distinct and separate cause of action, and a judgment obtained on one will constitute no bar to an action for the recovery of the others.
    APPEAL from the Superior Court of Mendocino County.
    This was an action against the defendant county for personal services rendered, for which plaintiff presented to the. board of supervisors his several claims, which claims were rejected. Defendant in the answer denied the validity of a portion of the claims, and set up the fact the plaintiff had already recovered one judgment against the defendant for a portion of such claims and that the action on the rest of such claims is therefore barred. .
    Archibald Yell for appellant; Thomas B. Bond for respondent.
   By the COURT.

Unless the plaintiff’s action was barred by the former judgment, the defendant was not materially prejudiced by any of the alleged errors, and the judgment should not be reversed for any error which does not affect the substantial rights, of the parties. In our opinion, the former judgment, which it is claimed constitutes a bar to this action, cannot be held to have that effect.

We think each claim presented to and rejected by the board of supervisors constituted a distinct and separate cause of action, and that a judgment obtained on one would constitute no bar to an action for the recovery of the others.

Judgment and order affirmed.  