Blaco v. State
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error from the district court of Lancaster county. Tried below before Holmes, J. The opinion contains a statement of the case. The act purporting to create the office of state inspector of oils is void, because it is an attempt to create an executive state office in violation of section 26, article 5, of the constitution, forbidding the creation of offices other than those named in the constitution.
Read the full summary
Error from the district court of Lancaster county. Tried below before Holmes, J. The opinion contains a statement of the case. The act purporting to create the office of state inspector of oils is void, because it is an attempt to create an executive state office in violation of section 26, article 5, of the constitution, forbidding the creation of offices other than those named in the constitution. (In re Railroad Commissioners, 15 Neb. 679; Rowland v. City of Neto York, 83 N. Y. 372; United States v. Hartwell, 6 Wall. [U. S.] 385; Shelby v. Alcorn, 36 Miss. 273; IJill v. Boyland, 40 Miss.…
1Opinion of the CourtSullivan, J.
In 1887 there was passed and approved an act of the legislature providing for the appointment of a state inspector of oils, defining his duties, fixing his fees, and prescribing penalties. (Compiled Statutes 1887, ch. 64, art. 2.) In March, 1893, Lozein F. Hilton was, under the authority of this statute, appointed state inspector of oils. He accepted the appointment and, in compliance with section 4 of the act, executed to the state of Nebraska a bond conditioned as follows: “The condition of this bond is such, that whereas the above bounden, Lozein F. Hilton, has been duly appointed by the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- County Treasurer v. BunburyMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
- Morris v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1877
- King v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- County of Marquette v. WardMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
- Village of Olean v. . KingNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- People of Sioux County v. National Surety Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1928
- State v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1910
- Paxton v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1899
- Wadhams Oil Co. v. Tracy, State Supervisor of Inspectors of Illuminating OilsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
- State v. PorterNebraska Supreme Court · 1903
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.