State ex rel. Wah-We-Yea-Cumin v. Olson
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Information for a writ of quo warranto directed to the members of the board of county commissioners of the county of Mahnomen which set forth the facts stated in the first paragraph of the opinion and alleged that all of the proceedings touching the creation of the county of Mahnomen were void for the reason that the territory comprising the county of Norman did not have two thousand inhabitants and that the county of Mahnomen never had to exceed eleven hundred inhabitants.
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
Relator, who is under indictment by the grand jury of Mahnomen county and soon to be tried thereon in the district court of that county, applies to this court for a writ of quo warranto for the purpose of inquiring into and having determined the validity of the proceedings had and taken for the organization of the county. The county was organized, if at all, under section 380, et seq., R. L,. 1905. Relator alleges that the proceedings had therefor were not in compliance with the statutes, and illegal and void, in consequence of which the county has no legal or valid existence, and no term of…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Ewing v. State Ex Rel. PollardTexas Supreme Court · 1891
- State ex rel. Brown v. Town of WestportSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- State v. LeathermanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1881
- Barnum v. GilmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1881
- Jameson v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1855
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Nelson v. Consol. Independent Sch. Dist. of Troy MillsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1917
- Evens v. AndersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
- Enos v. District CourtSupreme Court of Colorado · 1951
- Jackson v. FreemanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1995
- Cheek v. EyeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.