State ex rel. Wattam v. Poindexter
North Dakota Supreme Court
Action of mandamus in District Court, Nuessle, J. From an order sustaining a motion to quash the petition, the petitioners have appealed. “There is no doubt in the power of either branch of Congress or legislature to appoint a committee of investigation without concurrence of the other branch, to act during the session.”
Read the full summary
Action of mandamus in District Court, Nuessle, J. From an order sustaining a motion to quash the petition, the petitioners have appealed. “There is no doubt in the power of either branch of Congress or legislature to appoint a committee of investigation without concurrence of the other branch, to act during the session.” Re Chapman, 166 U. S. 66i; 41 D. Ed. 1154; Anderson v. Dunn, 6 Wheat. 204; Ex Parte Dalton, 44 Ohio State, 142. This Court has said: “The contemporaneous construction placed thereon (referring to a statute under consideration) by the various administrative officers and boards…
1DissentBirdzell, J.
I dissent from the conclusions reached by the majority for the reason that in my opinion the applicable legislative enactments have not been properly construed. I express no opinion on the constitutional question discussed, as I do not deem it involved. In order to set forth clearly the basis for this difference of opinion, it is necessary to briefly state the substance of the provisions of the statutes relating to the payment of legislative expenses. Section 34, C. L. 1913, enumerates the officers and employees of the Senate and House of Representatives ol the Legislative Assembly. Section…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State ex rel. Wallace v. JorgensonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1916