Legal Opinion
State Ex Rel. Ryan v. Pietrzykowski
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided May 6, 1969No. 204PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHallows, C. J.
We agree with the trial court that the scope of the mandamus action could not properly encompass the license of August 15th because that license was not in existence at the time of the petitioners’ application for the writ.
In State ex rel. Racine County v. Schmidt (1959), 7 Wis. 2d 528, 534, 97 N. W. 2d 493, this court approved the rule stated in State ex rel. Board of Education v. Hunter (1901), 111 Wis. 582, 588, 87 N. W. 485: “. . . mandamus will not lie to compel performance of an act by a public officer unless the act be one that is actually due from the officer at the time of the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Holzbauer v. RitterWisconsin Supreme Court · 1924
- State ex rel. City of Milwaukee v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
- Town of Burke v. City of MadisonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
- Jelinski v. EggersWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- State Ex Rel. Racine County v. SchmidtWisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Gloudeman v. City of St. FrancisCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1988
- Laskaris v. City of Wisconsin Dells, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1986
- Edelbeck v. Town of TheresaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
- Racine County v. AlbyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
- Foresight, Inc. v. BablCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1997
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.