Legal Opinion

Meissner v. Boyle

Utah Supreme Court

Decided October 30, 1899PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeal from the Second District Court, Weber county, Hon. H. H. Rolapp, Judge. Application by plaintiff for a writ of mandamus to enforce payment for services alleged to have been performed by himself and another as patrolmen of police in Ogden city. From a judgment denying the writ plaintiff appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtBaskin, J.

This is a case in which the plaintiff, who is the appellant, seeks by mandamus to enforce payment for services alleged to have been performed by himself and his as-signee, D. O. Sullivan, as patrolmen of police of Ogden city.

The record does not contain the evidence, and therefore the only question presented is, whether the findings of the trial court warrant the conclusions of law and the judgment rendered thereon.

The trial court found that the petitioner and his assignor, D. 0. Sullivan, were duly appointed to the office of patrol policemen of Ogden Oity on the 10th day of March, 1894, and…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Heath v. Salt Lake CityUtah Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Hulaniski v. Ogden CityUtah Supreme Court · 1899

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Quintin v. EdwardsMontana Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Crawford v. HuntArizona Supreme Court · 1932
  3. City of Shawnee v. HewettSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
  4. State v. MorascoUtah Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Opinion No., Arkansas Attorney General Reports2005

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API