Attorney-General Ex Rel. Woodbury v. Bickford
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Information, in the nature of quo warranto, to determine the right of the defendant to the office of superintendent of schools in Manchester. The board of school committee is a municipal body which is authorized and required to elect biennially in the month of June a superintendent of public instruction for the city.
Read the full summary
Information, in the nature of quo warranto, to determine the right of the defendant to the office of superintendent of schools in Manchester. The board of school committee is a municipal body which is authorized and required to elect biennially in the month of June a superintendent of public instruction for the city. The defendant held the office for the term ending July 1, 1914. June 5, 1914, the school board at a regular meeting voted to proceed to ballot for a superintendent. Thereupon a vote was taken which resulted as follows: Charles W. Bickford, five votes; John Smith, two votes; John…
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
At the time of the attempted election of a superintendent of schools by the school board, a quorum of the board were present. It then had the necessary legal authority to proceed with the election, and if a candidate for that office had received a majority of the votes cast he would have been legally elected. It is assumed by counsel in argument that a majority vote was necessary for an election, and the case has been considered upon that assumption. But it is not necessary that the successful candidate should receive a majority of the votes of those present constituting the quorum; a…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Lawrence v. IngersollTennessee Supreme Court · 1889
- Murdoch v. StrangeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1904
- State ex rel. Cole v. ChapmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1878
3Cited by2 opinions
- Frost v. HoarSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1932
- State v. City of TampaSupreme Court of Florida · 1939