State ex rel. Osborne v. Thorne
Nebraska Supreme Court
Original application for mandamus. contended tbat tbe respondent, having money in his possession, derived from a special levy, for the specific purpose of paying the interest on the bonds in question, that the act of payment is a naked ministerial duty, clearly incumbent upon respondent, the performance of .which will be ■compelled by mandamus. High on Ex. Remedies, secs. 80, 81, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 104, 106, 112, and cases cited.
Read the full summary
Original application for mandamus. contended tbat tbe respondent, having money in his possession, derived from a special levy, for the specific purpose of paying the interest on the bonds in question, that the act of payment is a naked ministerial duty, clearly incumbent upon respondent, the performance of .which will be ■compelled by mandamus. High on Ex. Remedies, secs. 80, 81, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 104, 106, 112, and cases cited. Ib., 324 and 326, and cases cited, and 333, 357, 365, and 367. Moses on Mandamus, 140, 141, 142. People v. Solomon, Am. Law Reg., 237. Savage v. TIolmes, 15 La.…
1Opinion of the CourtLake, J.
This is an original application to this court for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel the defendant, as treasurer of Adams county, to pay from the funds in his hands, collected for that purpose, the interest alleged to be due on certain precinct bonds, issued, by the commissioners of said county, and now held by the relator.
There is a technical defect in the petition which of itself might be fatal to this application. It is not alleged in terms, nor is it a necessary inference from other facts stated, that the bonds in question were intended “to aid” a work or “works of internal…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Davenport v. County of DodgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Blair v. Cuming CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- First National Bank of Enid v. YeomanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1904
- Board of County Commissioners v. McNamarNebraska Supreme Court · 1880