People, ex rel. Eastman v. Seaman
New York Supreme Court
Information in the nature of a quo warranto to determine the tide of the defendant to the office of supervisor of the town of Pawling, in the county of Dutchess, tried at the Dutchess circuit in March, 1844, before Pvuggles, late Cir.
Read the full summary
Information in the nature of a quo warranto to determine the tide of the defendant to the office of supervisor of the town of Pawling, in the county of Dutchess, tried at the Dutchess circuit in March, 1844, before Pvuggles, late Cir. J. The jury found a special verdict, in which it was stated that at the annual town meeting fqr that town held on the 4th day of April, 1843, the presiding officers declared that the votes were equally divided between the defendant and the relator, each having received 155 votes. The certificate of the presiding officers, filed according to law, stated the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Whittlesey, J.
The special verdict finds • that the ballot given for J. R. Eastman was intended for the relator. This fact brings this case within the doctrine established in The People v. Ferguson, (8 Cowen’s Rep. 102,) and several subsequent cases, and indicates clearly that the relator was legally entitled to the office of supervisor. It is held in all the cases that in a proceeding of this kind instituted to try the right of office directly, it is competent to go behind the certificates, which would otherwise be conclusive, to ascertain the real facts of the case. Such…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People v. LoomisNew York Supreme Court · 1832
- Wood v. PeakeNew York Supreme Court · 1811
3Cited by32 opinions
- The People v. . CookNew York Court of Appeals · 1853
- People Ex Rel. Smith v. PeaseNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
- Dishon v. SmithSupreme Court of Iowa · 1859
- People v. CookNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- City of Beardstown v. City of VirginiaIllinois Supreme Court · 1875
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.