Legal Opinion

Parsons v. Diefendorf

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided June 1, 1933No. 6038PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBudge, C. J.

This is an original proceeding in this court for writ of prohibition. The affidavit in support of the application for the writ, after setting out that the proceeding is brought by plaintiff as state auditor and in his individual capacity, contains substantially the following aver-ments : That the defendant is the duly elected, qualified and acting commissioner of public investments of the state of Idaho, and as such commissioner is in charge of the Department of Public Investments; that in such official capacity he has and claims power to control, loan and invest all the permanent funds of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Pike v. State Board of Land CommissionersIdaho Supreme Court · 1911
  2. State v. FitzpatrickIdaho Supreme Court · 1897

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Engelking v. Investment BoardIdaho Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Chastain's, Inc. v. State Tax CommissionIdaho Supreme Court · 1952
  3. State v. ConleyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1937
  4. State v. PetersonIdaho Supreme Court · 1939
  5. Schelle v. FossSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1957

9 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