Legal Opinion
State v. Shaw
Superior Court of Delaware
Decided October 17, 1956No. 56; 55; 54; 56, 55 and 54PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Herrmann, J.:
These three quo warranto proceedings have been instituted to try the title of the defendants to certain public offices. Their title to office is challenged on the ground that the Statutes by which they were appointed are unconstitutional and invalid.
The case of State ex rel. Craven, Atty. Gen. v. Shaw, is intended to test the title of the defendants named therein to office as members of the State Highway Department to which they were appointed by Ch. 548 of 50 Laws of Delaware, 17 Del. C. §§ 111, 114, 116, 118, 151. The case of State ex rel. Craven, Atty. Gen. v. Conway, was…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Fletcher v. PeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1810
- Monacelli v. GrimesSupreme Court of Delaware · 1953
- Suermann v. Hadley, Treas. (White)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- Collison v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1938
- Commonwealth ex rel. Wolfe v. ButlerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1882
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Downs v. JacobsSupreme Court of Delaware · 1970
- Wilson v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 1970
- State Ex Rel. Tate v. CubbageSuperior Court of Delaware · 1965
- State Ex Rel. Gebelein v. KillenSupreme Court of Delaware · 1982
- duPont v. Director of the Division of Revenue of the Department of FinanceSupreme Court of Delaware · 1975
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.