State ex rel. Young v. Holgate
Supreme Court of Minnesota
On the relation of the attorney general, the state instituted mandamus proceedings in the district court for St. Louis county to compel the treasurer of that county to pay the state the unpaid balance of $117,-070.54, part of the proceeds of certain tax collections of the year 1899. The answer set up that the unpaid balance was that portion of the funds of the county belonging to the state wholly lost by the suspension, failure and bankruptcy of certain banks duly designated…
Read the full summary
On the relation of the attorney general, the state instituted mandamus proceedings in the district court for St. Louis county to compel the treasurer of that county to pay the state the unpaid balance of $117,-070.54, part of the proceeds of certain tax collections of the year 1899. The answer set up that the unpaid balance was that portion of the funds of the county belonging to the state wholly lost by the suspension, failure and bankruptcy of certain banks duly designated as depositories of public funds under the statutes. The terms of office of the attorney general and of the county…
1Opinion of the Court
ELLIOTT. X
The state, on the relation of the attorney general, commenced mandamus proceedings to compel the treasurer of St. Louis county to pay to the state the proceeds of certain tax collections. The appeal is from a judgment in favor of the state.
At the time of the regular quarterly settlement in August, 1899, St. Louis county had on hand moneys collected for the state since the last previous settlement in the sum of $117,070.54. On August 31, 1899, the state auditor drew a draft on the county treasurer for said sum. The treasurer paid the amount of this draft, less the sum of $17,154.74,…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- State v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1871
- ParkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- State v. Portsmouth Savings BankIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
- The People Ex Rel. Dannat v. . ComptrollerNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Moore v. TateTennessee Supreme Court · 1889
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- In Re Monongahela Rye Liquors, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1944
- State v. Humble Oil & Refining Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1943
- People v. Kings County Development Co.California Court of Appeal · 1920
- People Ex Rel. Mosk v. BarenfeldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
- State v. BucholzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.