State ex rel. Ewing v. Francis
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis. — Hon. Shepard Barclay, Judge. (1) The act of March 27, 1883, is not limited in its operation to election contests under 2 Revised Statutes, chapter 101, but includes election contests where the remedy is by information in the nature of 'quo warranto.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis. — Hon. Shepard Barclay, Judge. (1) The act of March 27, 1883, is not limited in its operation to election contests under 2 Revised Statutes, chapter 101, but includes election contests where the remedy is by information in the nature of 'quo warranto. Quo toarranto has been recognized by the Supreme' Court of Missouri during all the time our statute has contained a provision for statutory contests as the most effectual, complete and comprehensive remedy in all cases of contested elections, especially for the great offices of the state.…
1Opinion of the CourtHenry, C. J.
This is a proceeding in the nature of a quo warranto, commenced in the circuit court of the city of St. Louis. The petition avers that on Tuesday, seventh of April, 1885, an election was duly held in the city of St. Louis, for certain offices in and for said city, including that of mayor. That at said election, the relator and respondent were candidates for said office, and that relator then had, and now has, all the qualifications for said office prescribed by law. That he received a larger number of legal votes than were cast for respondent, or any other candidate, and was duly elected.…
2Cited by20 opinions
- Toncray v. BudgeIdaho Supreme Court · 1908
- State Ex Inf. McKittrick v. WymoreSupreme Court of Missouri · 1938
- State Ex Rel. Miller v. O'MalleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1938
- People ex rel. Barton v. LondonerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1889
- Ex parte ArnoldSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.