Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Biggs v. Corley

Supreme Court of Delaware

Decided April 3, 1934PublishedCited by 44 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Layton, C. J.,

delivering the opinion of the Court:

One of the questions presented for determination is concerned with the status of the relator, who, as a citizen and taxpayer, has instituted these proceedings. They involve questions of public rights and duties. The object and purpose of the writs of mandamus are to procure the enforcement of public duties. No special interest in the result of the proceedings need be shown. It is sufficient that the relator is a citizen and, as such, interested in the enforcement of the laws. While a senator must be elected from a particular district, yet,…

2Cases cited42 opinions

  1. People ex rel. Drake v. MahaneyMichigan Supreme Court · 1865
  2. United States v. HartwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1868
  3. People Ex Rel. Sherwood v. State Board of CanvassersNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  4. French v. SenateCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
  5. State ex rel. Walker v. BusSupreme Court of Missouri · 1896

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

3Cited by44 opinions

  1. Wells v. PurcellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1979
  2. Duffy v. ConawayCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1983
  3. Evans v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 2005
  4. Walker v. YuchtDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1972
  5. In Re JonesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984

39 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