Commonwealth v. Keiser
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
1Opinion of the Court
Gordon, Jr., P. J.,
This is a •motion to quash a writ of quo warranto. Of the nine reasons assigned for quashing the writ, the sixth, seventh, and eighth alone are properly cognizable on a motion to quash. These are that we are without jurisdiction to try the title to office of a magistrate, and that the district attorney has no standing to prosecute the writ, which, it is alleged, can only be maintained by the Attorney General. These reasons are without merit: Commonwealth ex rel. v. Taylor et al., 159 Pa. 451; Commonwealth ex rel. v. Cameron, 259 Pa. 209; Commonwealth ex rel. v. Franek, 311…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Commonwealth Ex Rel. Schermer v. FranekSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- Commonwealth ex rel. v. TaylorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- Commonwealth ex rel. Graham v. CameronSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1917