Grieve v. Gulick
Hawaii Supreme Court
Mandamus. On Appeal erom Austin, J. Mandamus lies to compel the Minister of the Interior to present to the King in Privy Council a petition for a charter of incorporation, that being a matter in which the statute does not allow him discretion. Judd, C. J., dissenting.
1Dissent
Dissenting Opinion oe
Chiee Justice Judd.
I think the law ought to be as laid down by my learned associates. It should not be in the power of one man to prevent at his caprice the incorporating of business enterprises. But the words of the statute seem to me to confer this power on the Minister of Interior. I think they give the Minister the authority to use his discretion in refusing to grant a charter, and this implies that he may refuse to present the application for the consideration of His Majesty in Privy Council. For it would be presumptuous in him and disrespectful to His Majesty to…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Marbury v. MadisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1803
- Ex Parte MilliganSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- Oroville & Va. R.R. v. Supervisors of Plumas Cty.California Supreme Court · 1869
- Howland v. . EldredgeNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- People ex rel. S.F. Gas Co. v. Bd. of Supervisors of S.F.California Supreme Court · 1858
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.