Olcott v. Hoff
Oregon Supreme Court
Original proceeding in Supreme Court. In Banc. This is an original proceeding on a petition for an alternative writ of mandamus, in which it is alleged that at the general election on November 5, 1918, James Withycom.be was elected governor of the state of Oregon and that he duly qualified for that office on January 14, 1919; that at the general election held on November 7, 1916, the petitioner, Ben W. Olcott, was elected secretary of state of the state of Oregon and that he…
Read the full summary
Original proceeding in Supreme Court. In Banc. This is an original proceeding on a petition for an alternative writ of mandamus, in which it is alleged that at the general election on November 5, 1918, James Withycom.be was elected governor of the state of Oregon and that he duly qualified for that office on January 14, 1919; that at the general election held on November 7, 1916, the petitioner, Ben W. Olcott, was elected secretary of state of the state of Oregon and that he duly qualified for that office on December 26, 1916; that ever since he “has been and now is the duly qualified'and…
1Opinion of the CourtJohns, J.
Under our form of government all power, both state and federal, is vested in the legislative, executive and judicial departments. Each is separate and distinct from the other. In the affairs of state the governor is the chief executive and all other officers in that branch are more or less subordinate to his position. The office of secretary of state is next in importance. Article III, Section 1, of the Constitution provides:
“The powers of the government shall be divided into three separate departments — the legislative, the executive, including the administrative, and the judicial; and no…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- State v. FinchOregon Supreme Court · 1909
- State ex rel. Marr v. StearnsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
- Kalich v. KnappOregon Supreme Court · 1914
- People ex rel. Lynch v. BuddCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Clifford v. HellerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1899
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Manby v. VoorheesNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1921
- Fitzpatrick v. McAlisterSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
- State v. OlcottOregon Supreme Court · 1920
- State Ex Rel. De Concini v. GarveyArizona Supreme Court · 1948
- State v. ButlerOregon Supreme Court · 1919
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.