Legal Opinion

Hendershot v. State ex rel. Bennett

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided January 28, 1904No. , 20,162PublishedCited by 3 opinions

From Perry Circuit Court; C. W. Cook, Judge. Quo warranto by the State, on the relation of James B. Bennett, against Claude T. Hendershot. From a judgment in favor of relator, respondent appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtHadley, J.

Quo warranto for possession of the office of secretary of the board of health of Perry county. It is disclosed by the pleadings that the term of appellant, as an incumbent of the office, expired on January 1, 1903, and on January 5, 1903, the relator was by the board of commissioners of the county duly elected as appellant’s successor in said office. Judgment that the relator was entitled to the office.

But two questions are argued, both of which arise upon the pleadings, and they are the only ones decided: (1) The constitutionality of an act of the General Assembly approved February 7, 1899…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Wampler v. State ex rel. AlexanderIndiana Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Rohrof v. SchulteIndiana Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Sackett v. State ex rel. ForemanIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
  4. Lingquist v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1899

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State ex rel. White v. ScottIndiana Supreme Court · 1908
  2. Draper v. ZebecIndiana Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Town of Dublin v. State Ex Rel. KirkpatrickIndiana Supreme Court · 1926

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API