Legal Opinion
People ex rel. Fulton v. O'Ryan
Supreme Court of Colorado
Decided April 3, 1922No. 10,144PublishedCited by 3 opinions
On motion for judgment for costs.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Denison
This was a proceeding in mandamus in the district court by Fulton, claiming under the civil service law, as secretary of the State Board of Charities and Corrections, to compel the board to pay her as such.
The district court denied the mandamus; we reversed that decision on error. The plaintiff in error now asks judgment for costs. The rule seems to be that no costs can be recovered against a public officer prosecuting or defending as such in good faith. Houston v. The Neuse River Navigation Co., 53 N. C. 476; Scrafford v. Gladwin County Supervisors, 42 Mich. 464, 4 N. W. 167; O’Connor v.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- O'Connor v. WalshAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903
- Houston v. Neuse River NavigationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1862
- Scrafford v. Supervisors for GladwinMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
3Cited by3 opinions
- City of Colorado Springs v. StreetSupreme Court of Colorado · 1927
- Dietemann v. People Ex Rel. BlackmanSupreme Court of Colorado · 1925
- Stong v. MillikenSupreme Court of Colorado · 1925