Smyth v. Titcomb
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Petition for mandamus. The respondent was treasurer of the town of Brunswick. Some proceedings were had by the inhabitants of that town, in April, 1848, with a view to the consolidation of three of its school districts into one, to be called the village district. These proceedings are sufficiently stated in the decision of the case by the court.
Read the full summary
Petition for mandamus. The respondent was treasurer of the town of Brunswick. Some proceedings were had by the inhabitants of that town, in April, 1848, with a view to the consolidation of three of its school districts into one, to be called the village district. These proceedings are sufficiently stated in the decision of the case by the court. In August, 1848, an Act of the Legislature authorized the inhabitants of the village district to raise, for the support of schools, a sum not exceeding, in any one year, three-fifths of the amount, apportioned to said district from the school money…
1Opinion of the CourtHoward, J.
This court has power to issue writs of mandamus to courts of inferior jurisdiction, to corporations and individuals, when it “ may be necessary for the furtherance of justice, and the due execution of the laws.” Rev. Stat. c. 96, § 5. As a court of the highest common law jurisdiction, it would have this judicial sovereignty and general superintendence throughout the State, upon the principles of the common law, if there were no statute upon the subject. It is the only power through which magistrates of inferior jurisdiction, and officers of the law, can be compelled to perform their official…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Kendall v. United States Ex Rel. StokesSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
- People ex relat. Bush & Higby v. CollinsNew York Supreme Court · 1811
- Thomas v. LelandNew York Supreme Court · 1840
- People ex rel. Doughty v. Judges of Dutchess C. P.New York Supreme Court · 1839
- Ex Parte Jesse HoytSupreme Court of the United States · 1839
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Lockyer v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- Ames v. People ex rel. TempleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1899
- State ex rel. University of Utah v. CandlandUtah Supreme Court · 1909
- State ex rel. Wiles v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1910
- State ex rel. Miller v. BuchananWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1884
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.