Sawyer v. Mayhew
South Dakota Supreme Court
Original application by H. W. Sawyer for a writ of mandamus to compel H. E. Mayhew, state auditor, to draw a warrant. The facts are stated in the opinion. The state auditor, under Sec. 50 Comp. Laws, is clothed with full judicial and discretionary powers, such powers as can not be controlled by courts upon mandamus.
Read the full summary
Original application by H. W. Sawyer for a writ of mandamus to compel H. E. Mayhew, state auditor, to draw a warrant. The facts are stated in the opinion. The state auditor, under Sec. 50 Comp. Laws, is clothed with full judicial and discretionary powers, such powers as can not be controlled by courts upon mandamus. State v. Hastings, 10 Wis. 461, 468; State v. Doyle, 38 Wis. 92; People v. Auditor, 2 Colo. 97; People v. Board, 11 Cal. 43. While mandamus will lie against a state auditor to compel him to act, yet when he has acted and in a discretionary matter, mandamus will not lie to review…
1Opinion of the CourtFuller, J.
Plaintiff, who is the secretary of the board of railroad commissioners, applies originally to this court for a mandamus to compel the auditor of this state to draw a warrant upon the state treasurer for $50.47 in payment of the following itemized expense account:
State of South Dakota, to H. W. Sawyer, Dr.
Jan’y 28, ’97. Hotel, Pierre, 1-28 to 2-1............................ $ 8 00
Feb’y 21, 197. Hotel, Pierre, 2-37 to 2-21............................ 8 00
Mar. 8, ’97. Expenses on trip to Des Moines and. Chicago:
Mar. 8. Breakfast, dinner, Huron.................................. 1 00
Mar. 8.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- People Ex Rel. Francis v. . Common CouncilNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
- State ex rel. Adamson v. Lafayette County CourtSupreme Court of Missouri · 1867
- Hoole v. KinkeadNevada Supreme Court · 1881
- People ex rel. Ambler v. Auditor GeneralMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
- State ex rel. Dakota Hail Ass'n v. CareyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1891
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Van v. GundersonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1929
- Cofman v. OusterhousNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1918
- Mitchell National Bank v. JonesSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1929