Legal Opinion

Wilson v. McCarron

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided September 10, 1914PublishedCited by 2 opinions

On report. Petition dismissed with costs. This is a petition in the nature of quo warranto, to determine the title to the office of city marshal of the city of Lewiston, held by the respondent and claimed by the relator, George R. Hall. McCarron filed an answer to the information, and said Hall filed a replication to the answer of said McCarron.

Read the full summary

On report. Petition dismissed with costs. This is a petition in the nature of quo warranto, to determine the title to the office of city marshal of the city of Lewiston, held by the respondent and claimed by the relator, George R. Hall. McCarron filed an answer to the information, and said Hall filed a replication to the answer of said McCarron. By consent of the parties, the cause was reported to the Law Court for determination upon the evidence submitted, including the agreed statement of facts. The ease is stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtHaley, J.

This is a petition in the nature of quo warranto, to determine the title to the office of city marshal of the city of Lewis-ton, and is before this court upon report.

Prior to 1880 the city marshal, and all members of the police force of the city of Lewiston, were chosen for one year, being elected by the City Council on the third Monday of March, or as soon thereafter as convenient, and served from the first day of April.

In 1880 the legislature enacted Chap. 293 of the Private and Special Laws, which was approved by the Governor on March 16, 1880, and. took effect upon its approval by the…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. People, Ex Rel. Mason v. . McClaveNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
  2. People ex rel. Gallup v. GreenNew York Supreme Court · 1829
  3. Baker v. KirkIndiana Supreme Court · 1870
  4. People Ex Rel. Joyce v. . BrundageNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
  5. State ex rel. Meredith v. TallmanWashington Supreme Court · 1901

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Kratzer v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1929
  2. City of Owensboro v. HazelCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1929

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

Powered by the Exa API