Legal Opinion

Tangeman v. Board of Aldermen

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided April 15, 1911No. 7449PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error to Denver District Court — Hon. Harry C. Biddle, Judge.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hill

On March 3, 1911, the plaintiff in error filed his ■petition for mandamus in which he alleges, in substance, that the respondents (defendant in error here) are the Board of Aldermen of the City and County of Denver; •that the petitioner is a qualified elector residing in the ninth ward in said city and brings this action for himself and on behalf of one thousand nine hundred and nine other qualified electors residing in said ward, who, together with himself, had signed a petition to recall Cornelius C. Worrall, the alderman of said ninth ward. Then follows a copy of the petition in which they…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Harris v. TuckerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1875
  2. People Ex Rel. Conliss v. . NorthNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
  3. Carlile v. HendersonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1892
  4. Carlson v. People ex rel. CharlsonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1905
  5. State Ex Rel. Waring v. WilroySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1849

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Palmer v. HartMontana Supreme Court · 1982
  2. No., Colorado Attorney General Reports1988

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API