Maverick Oil Company v. Hanson
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Petition for a mandamus to restrain Hanson from exercising the duties of the office of inspector of petroleum in Somersworth, on the ground that he is ineligible to the office, and that the compensation fixed by the selectmen for his services is excessive and unreasonable; and to command the other defendants, who are selectmen of Somersworth, to remove him from office and appoint a suitable person- thereto, and fix a just and equitable compensation for his services.
Read the full summary
Petition for a mandamus to restrain Hanson from exercising the duties of the office of inspector of petroleum in Somersworth, on the ground that he is ineligible to the office, and that the compensation fixed by the selectmen for his services is excessive and unreasonable; and to command the other defendants, who are selectmen of Somersworth, to remove him from office and appoint a suitable person- thereto, and fix a just and equitable compensation for his services. Facts found by the court. The plaintiffs are the defendants in Hanson v. Company, ante, and the defendant Hanson is the…
1Opinion of the CourtChase, J.
This is not a proper proceeding to determine Hanson’s right to the office in question. It should have been an information in the nature of quo warranto, or a petition therefor brought in the name of the attorney-general as representative of the state. Osgood v. Jones, 60 N. H. 543. As Hanson is an officer de facto, at least (Jewell v. Gilbert, 64 N. H. 13), it does not appear that there is any occasion for a mandamus to fill the office by a new appointment and incidentally fix the appointee’s compensation.
Petition dismissed.
Carpenter, J., did not sit: the others concurred.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Jewell v. GilbertSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1885
- Osgood v. JonesSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1881
3Cited by2 opinions
- Díaz Navarro v. KernSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1917
- Díaz Navarro v. KernSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1917