State ex rel. Buchholz v. Seehorn
Missouri Court of Appeals
Original Proceeding: Prohibition. (1) A public office, and not a mere employment, is involved herein. The commissioner of street cleaning is an officer, and not a mere employee. State ex rel. v. May, 106 Mo. 488; K. C. Charter, pp. 367-368. He is a municipal officer and not an officer “under the state” in the meaning of article 6, section 12 of the constitution.
Read the full summary
Original Proceeding: Prohibition. (1) A public office, and not a mere employment, is involved herein. The commissioner of street cleaning is an officer, and not a mere employee. State ex rel. v. May, 106 Mo. 488; K. C. Charter, pp. 367-368. He is a municipal officer and not an officer “under the state” in the meaning of article 6, section 12 of the constitution. State v. Ragsdale, 132 Mo. 210. (2) In the statement herein it is made to appear most clearly that the purpose of the equity suit was to establish the title of Collin's to the office of commissioner of street cleaning, and that the…
1DissentEllison, J.
I dissent in this case, but not because I believe that title to an office may be determined by injunction process. As stated by Judge Johnson, Judge Seehorn specifically disclaims that, in his return. The attorneys each agreed at the argument that that could not be done and I do not think it is in the case at all. The judge states in his return, as stated by Judge Johnson, that he was only proposing or intending to investigate whether Collins was, in truth, a de facto officer in possession of the office; and if he was such incumbent, whether relator was undertaking to intrude therein, take…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State ex rel. McCaffery v. AloeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1899
- Davison v. HoughSupreme Court of Missouri · 1901
- Flentge v. PriestSupreme Court of Missouri · 1873
- Price v. AdamsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1866
- Flentge v. PriestSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874