Ex parte Humphrey
New York Supreme Court
This is a question in the nature of a quo warranto, to determine whether certain individuals, appointed superintendents of ike poor of the county of Monroe in October last, were legally appointed.
Read the full summary
This is a question in the nature of a quo warranto, to determine whether certain individuals, appointed superintendents of ike poor of the county of Monroe in October last, were legally appointed. The statute directs that the superintendents of the poor shall be appointed by the board of supervisors and the judges of the court of common pleas of the respective counties, in the same manner and at the same time as commissioners of deeds are required by the revised statutes to be appointed, Laws of 1833, p. 506, § 4. That, manner is as follows: The judges and the supervisors meet in separate…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Savage, Ch. J.
I am of opinion that the individuals elected by joint ballot were legally appointed superintendents of the poor. It must be admitted that the conduct of the majority of the board of supervisors was fraudulent. The law made it their duty to nominate. They pretended that they could not agree ; and that it was mere pretence, appears from the case submitted to us. I therefore assume the fact that the supervisors refused to nominate. The judges did nominate, and there being no nomination by the supervisors of the persons nominated by the judges, the event had happened…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Gildersleeve v. Board of EducationNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1863
- Whiteside v. People ex rel. UphamNew York Supreme Court · 1841
- Beck v. HanscomSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1854