People ex rel. Morris v. Adams
New York Supreme Court
Quo warranto. This was an information in the nature of a quo warranto, filed by the attorney general against the defendant for claiming and exercising the office of constable in the town of Butternuts in Otsego. The defendant pleaded that at the annual town meeting held on the first Tuesday of March, 1831, he was duly elected to the office of constable, that he took the oath of office and gave security, &c. The attorney general replied, denying the election, <&c.
Read the full summary
Quo warranto. This was an information in the nature of a quo warranto, filed by the attorney general against the defendant for claiming and exercising the office of constable in the town of Butternuts in Otsego. The defendant pleaded that at the annual town meeting held on the first Tuesday of March, 1831, he was duly elected to the office of constable, that he took the oath of office and gave security, &c. The attorney general replied, denying the election, <&c. The cause was tried at the Otsego circuit in March, 1832, before the lion. Robert Monell, one of the circuit judges. The jury found…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Sutherland, J.
The facts found by the special verdict do not, in my opinion, show a sufficient determination of the electors of the town of Butternuts, previous to the year 1832, to limit the number of their constables to four. *335The statute, when it says that the electors of each town shall have power, at their annual town meeting, to determine what number of constables shall be chosen in such town for the then ensuing year, means a determination by a formal vote or resolution of the electors, in the same manner that they express their will on other subjects. Indeed, their will can…
2Cited by2 opinions
- In re Union InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1840
- Sawyer v. Manchester & Keene RailroadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1882