Wooster v. Mullins
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Suit for an injunction to restrain the defendants from making payments to two official newspapers of the city of Bridgeport; brought to the Court of Common Pleas in Fair-field County and tried to the court, Curtis, J., upon demurrer to the complaint; demurrer sustained and judgment rendered for the defendants, and appeal by the plaintiff for alleged errors in the rulings of the court.
Read the full summary
Suit for an injunction to restrain the defendants from making payments to two official newspapers of the city of Bridgeport; brought to the Court of Common Pleas in Fair-field County and tried to the court, Curtis, J., upon demurrer to the complaint; demurrer sustained and judgment rendered for the defendants, and appeal by the plaintiff for alleged errors in the rulings of the court. The charter of the city of Bridgeport requires the publication of the official proceedings of the Common Council in two of its daily newspapers, to be designated by the Common Council, and provides that “ in…
1Opinion of the Court
Baldwin, ’J.
The main question in this case is whether the vote of the aldermen was a tie vote within the meaning of the city charter.
The word tie, as applied to an appointment by election, signifies a state of equality between two or more competitors for the same position. Century Dictionary, in verb. The provision that two newspapers shall be designated by a vote in which no member of either branch of the Common Council shall vot'e for more than one, evidently contemplates the selection of one, and permits the selection of both, by the action of less than a majority of each board. “ In…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Ziomek v. BartimoleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1968
- McClain v. Church, MayorUtah Supreme Court · 1930
- Reeder v. TrotterTennessee Supreme Court · 1919