State v. Manlove
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Cameron. Tried below before the Hon. Wm, II. Russell. The character of this case is- clearly indicated in the opinion of the court and in the head notes.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Cameron. Tried below before the Hon. Wm, II. Russell. The character of this case is- clearly indicated in the opinion of the court and in the head notes. Trank E. Macmanus, Esq., was the relator, and he entitled his petition an “information in the nature of a quo wmrantof setting forth his own appointment by the court, and also impeaching the appellee’s title to the office on the ground that by the Constitution it was an elective office, and that the appointment of the appellee by the Governor was in violation of the Constitution, and therefore null and void. The court below…
1Opinion of the CourtOgden, J.
The State of Texas was erroneously made party, in this cause, in order to litigate matters between individuals of a purely individual character. The only question raised in the *800pleadings, is as to the right of the relator, as he is styled, to hold and exercise the office of district attorney pro tem., as - against the claims of F. J. Manlove, who had received the appointment and commission from the Governor of the State to the same office. This was most clearly an individual matter, and the court did not err in requiring Macmanus to execute an appeal bond. The.roai appellant claims the right…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Keenan v. PerryTexas Supreme Court · 1859
3Cited by8 opinions
- In re the Appointment of a Revisor of the StatutesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
- Coleman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2008
- Robertson v. CoughlinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
- Marnoch v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1879
- Coleman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2008
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.