Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Diepenbrock v. Gates

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 7, 1886PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Application for writ of quo loarranto.

1Opinion of the CourtGileillan, C. J.

This is an order to show cause why proceedings by quo warranto shall not be instituted to determine whether the relator or the respondent was elected to the office of alderman of the city of Eed Wing, at the city election, April 26,1886. The charter of the city (chapter 4, § 1; Sp. Laws 1876, c. 28, § 5, p. 97) provides that the city council shall “be the judges of the election and qualification of their own members.” The charter of the city of St. Paul contains a similar provision, and in the case of State v. Dowlan, 33 Minn. 536, (24 N. W. Rep. 188,) the judges of this court who heard the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. State ex rel. Simpson v. DowlanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Hawley v. WallaceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
  2. State ex rel. Young v. Village of KentSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1905
  3. Treat v. MorrisSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1910
  4. State ex rel. Love v. CosgraveNebraska Supreme Court · 1909
  5. State ex rel. Jarvis v. CraigSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API