State ex rel. Thompson v. Majors
Nebraska Supreme Court
Original action in quo warranto to determine the rights of respondents to office as members of the board of education of state normal schools.
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partReese, C. J.
In most respects I agree with the holdings in the opinion of the majority of the court. While I think the act of 1909 is defective, and in some respects vicious and reprehensible legislation, I am not fully convinced that the legislature has gone beyond its power under the constitution. I agree that under the authorities cited in Shull v. Barton, 58 Neb. 741, and in Sika v. Chicago & *390N. W. R. Co., 21 Wis. 370, “a statute which refers to and adopts the provisions of another statute is not repealed by the subsequent repeal of such other statute,” and which affirms Crosby v. Smith, 19 Wis. *449. In…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited11 opinions
- People ex rel. Drake v. MahaneyMichigan Supreme Court · 1865
- Phœnix Assurance Co. v. Fire DepartmentSupreme Court of Alabama · 1897
- Mok v. Detroit Building & Savings Ass'n No. 4Michigan Supreme Court · 1875
- People ex rel. Comstock v. Judge of Superior CourtMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
- State ex rel. Miller v. LeichIndiana Supreme Court · 1906
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.