Felker v. Henderson
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Petition, for a mandamus to compel the defendants as supervisors of the check-list in Rochester to put the plaintiff’s name upon the check-list of Ward 3. The court granted the prayer of the petition, and the defendants filed this bill of exceptions, which was allowed by Branch, J., at the September term, 1916, of the superior court. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
The evidentiary facts bearing on the question of the plaintiff’s right to vote in Ward 3 in Rochester are not disputed; and they may be stated as follows: He was born in that part of Rochester now known as Ward 3 and resided there with his parents, and, after becoming twenty-one years of age, he continued to reside there and had his legal residence there until 1901, when he was married. Previous to that time he had an office in Ward 5 where he practiced his profession as a lawyer, still having his home in Ward 3. Soon after his marriage, in 1901, he rented a house in Ward 5 where he and his…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Ennis v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1853
- Shaeffer v. GilbertCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1890
- State v. GroomeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1860
- Frame v. ThormannWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
- Inhabitants of Wilbraham v. Inhabitants of LudlowMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Sathre v. MoodieNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1935
- Goodloe v. HawkCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1940
- Shenton v. AbbottCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1940
- Lyon v. GlaserSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1972
- Bragg v. BraggCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.