Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Thompson v. Whitcomb

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided May 20, 1881PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Mandamus, directed to respondent as commissioner of the land-office of the state of Minnesota.

1Opinion of the Court

Gilfillan, C. J.*

In this case, the counsel, at the request of the court, argued very fully the effect of the act of March 7, 1881, (Laws 1881, c. 40,) amending Gen. St. 1878, c. 80, § 13, upon the jurisdiction of this court in cases of mandamus, the court having before it another case — State v. Burr, (ante, p. 40) — involving the same question, but which was not argued in that case. We have arrived at the conclusion stated in the opinion in that case, that, except in cases pending at the time the act passed, and those in which the writ is to be directed to a district court, or a judge…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Rice v. AustinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1872
  2. Western Railroad v. De GraffSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1880
  3. State ex rel. County Treasurer of Mille Lacs County v. DikeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1874
  4. St. Paul & Chicago Railway Co. v. BrownSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1877

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Railroad & Warehouse Commission v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
  2. Cooke v. IversonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1909
  3. Berman v. Minnesota State Agricultural SocietySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1904
  4. Jasperson Ex Rel. Drew v. JacobsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1947
  5. State ex rel. Kinsella v. EberhartSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API