Commonwealth ex rel. O'Connor v. McCuen
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia: No. 97, to January Term 1873. The history of the case was:— On the 28th of September 1872, James O’Connor presented a petition to the Court of Common Pleas for a mandamus to Alexander McCuen, Thomas M. Locke and James Bain, commanding them to pay the petitioner certain costs, alleged to have been incurred on the trial of an indictment against A. H. Tack and othei’S. The indictment charged A. H. Tack et al. with a conspiracy…
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia: No. 97, to January Term 1873. The history of the case was:— On the 28th of September 1872, James O’Connor presented a petition to the Court of Common Pleas for a mandamus to Alexander McCuen, Thomas M. Locke and James Bain, commanding them to pay the petitioner certain costs, alleged to have been incurred on the trial of an indictment against A. H. Tack and othei’S. The indictment charged A. H. Tack et al. with a conspiracy in being oil brokers and dealers in oil and conspiring to defraud the prosecutor, their principal and the public, by…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered, February 9th 1874, by
Agnew, C. J.
This is not a proceeding in the Court of Quarter Sessions. It is a petition to the Court of Common Pleas for a writ of mandamus to compel the city commissioners to draw their warrant on the city treasurer for payment of a bill of costs incurred in the Quarter Sessions. The facts are set forth in the petition and answer and also in the history of the case, and are therefore regularly before us as the ground on which the mandamus is asked for. James O’Connor, the relator, prosecuted an indictment in the Quarter Sessions…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hester's CaseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841
3Cited by1 opinion
- Long v. Lancaster CountySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1901