Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Attorney General v. Vail

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided July 15, 1873PublishedCited by 65 opinions

Quo Warranto. I. This Court has jurisdiction. (Const.,, Mo., Art.YI. § III.) II. This case must proceed by com. law, because in such cases in this State we have only com. law and equitable remedies, III. A commission issued to a party by the Governor is not conclusive as against the State, complaining, through lier proper officer.

Read the full summary

Quo Warranto. I. This Court has jurisdiction. (Const.,, Mo., Art.YI. § III.) II. This case must proceed by com. law, because in such cases in this State we have only com. law and equitable remedies, III. A commission issued to a party by the Governor is not conclusive as against the State, complaining, through lier proper officer. (44 Mo., 223; 45 Mo., 59 ; 18 Lou., (An.) 517 ; State vs. McAdoo, 36 Mo., 453; State vs. McBride, 4 Mo., 303; 44 Mo., 229; 44 Mo., 230; 44 Mo., 160 ; 15 Johns., N. Y., 388; 45 Mo., 59 ; 36 Mo., 279 ; 44 Mo., 129.) In the cases cited by respondent tbe Court refused…

1Opinion of the CourtNapton, Judge

This is a proceeding by the State through the Attorney Gen eral, by way of information in the nature of a quo war (into.

The information was filed ex officio, without leave of the court.

This information recites in substance, that prior to, and at the general election, on the 3rd day of November, 1868, by the Constitution and laws of this State, the office of Judge of the 15th Judicial Circuit, was an elective office ; that at said election there were two candidates, one of whom was the defendant, and the other one Louis F. Dinning; that Dinning *104had all the qualifications required by the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Off v. SmithWisconsin Supreme Court · 1861
  2. Saunders v. HaynesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
  3. State v. McBrideSupreme Court of Missouri · 1836
  4. Gulick v. NewIndiana Supreme Court · 1860
  5. State ex rel. McIlhany v. StewartSupreme Court of Missouri · 1862

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

3Cited by65 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Mullen v. DohertyWashington Supreme Court · 1897
  2. State ex inf. Hadley v. Standard Oil Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1909
  3. State ex rel. McCaffery v. AloeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1899
  4. Crovatt v. MasonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
  5. Reynolds v. State, ex rel. TitusIndiana Supreme Court · 1878

60 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