Legal Opinion · Dissent

Cooke v. Roberts

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 22, 1939No. Appeal, 44Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Mr. Justice. Barnes:

I cannot concur in the majority opinion because .1 am convinced that appellant is entitled to the compensation which he seeks for the services rendered by-him, pending the determination of his appeal to this’ Court from- the judgment of . ouster entered against him in the court of common pleas.

While it is . true that'in a number of our cases it has been stated that “one who is merely a de facto and not a de jure officer cannot claim compensation for official services” (Jones v. Dusman, 246 Pa. 513, 515; Com. ex rel. Shoemaker v. Thomas, 328 Pa. 19,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Suermann v. Hadley, Treas. (White)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
  2. Jones v. DusmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
  3. New Brighton & New Castle Railroad v. Pittsburgh, Youngstown & Chicago RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884
  4. Commonwealth Ex Rel. Shoemaker v. ThomasSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
  5. County of Luzerne v. TrimmerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1880

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API