Gamble v. First Judicial District Court
Nevada Supreme Court
Application for writ of mandamus by B. A. Gamble and F. T; Oliadbourne against the District Court of the First Judicial District of the State of Nevada, Esmeralda County, and M. A. Murphy, the Judge thereof. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion. I. No affidavit was required to show the disqualification of the honorable judge of this court.
Read the full summary
Application for writ of mandamus by B. A. Gamble and F. T; Oliadbourne against the District Court of the First Judicial District of the State of Nevada, Esmeralda County, and M. A. Murphy, the Judge thereof. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion. I. No affidavit was required to show the disqualification of the honorable judge of this court. The fact of his disqualification being the matter within his own personal knowledge, as a judge of this court, he would take judicial notice thereof. {Allen v. Reilly, 15 Nev. 452, 455-6; Table Mt. Co. v.W. D. S. Min. Go., 4 Nev. 218, 221, 222;…
1Dissent
I am not able to concur in the opinion of my esteemed associates. The California case cited is not in point, because there the motion was made in open court, and notice was given or waived by appearance, and the statute in that state is materially different from ours. In my judgment, sufficient facts are not shown here by the petition or by the evidence to warrant the issuance of the writ.
It appears that on February 23d a copy of the application for the removal of the case pending in Esmeralda county was served upon respondent in Carson City, and subsequently, on April 4th, the original was…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- People v. Ah SamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
- Wightman v. KarsnerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1852
- Brumley v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1859
- State ex rel. Keane v. MurphyNevada Supreme Court · 1885
- State v. SullivanMontana Supreme Court · 1890
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.