Legal Opinion

State ex inf. Crow v. Smith

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided December 5, 1899PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Quo Warranto. (1) Taking the oath of office by respondent, appointing a clerk of the court, and demanding possession of all the dockets and records thereof, is a sufficient user of the office to sustain an information in quo warranto.

Read the full summary

Quo Warranto. (1) Taking the oath of office by respondent, appointing a clerk of the court, and demanding possession of all the dockets and records thereof, is a sufficient user of the office to sustain an information in quo warranto. State ex rel. v. Graham, 13 Kan. 136; State ex rel. v. Meek, 129 Mo. 431. (2) An office of justice of the peace in the city of St. Louis is not vacant so long as it is occupied in the manner provided by section 37, article VT, and section 5, article XIV, Constitution 1875, and the Act of 1891 (Laws 1891, p.175), by an incumbent who is legally qualified to…

1Opinion of the CourtMarshall, J.

This is a proceeding by quo warranto, instituted in this court by the Attorney-General, ex officio, to oust defendant from the office of justice of the peace of the fourth district in the city of St. Louis. The facts are these: At the regular election in 1894 Patrick Sheehan was elected and thereafter duly qualified as the justice of the peace for said district. Before the expiration of his regular term of four years, he died, and in May, 1896, Richard B. Haughtou was regularly appointed to fill the vacancy thus occasioned, and thereafter' duly qualified and was commissioned to fill the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Attorney General v. RansonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1880
  2. State ex rel. Tredway v. LuskSupreme Court of Missouri · 1853
  3. State ex rel. Attorney General v. SeaySupreme Court of Missouri · 1876
  4. State ex rel. Cosgrove v. PerkinsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1897
  5. State ex rel. Withers v. StonestreetSupreme Court of Missouri · 1889

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State ex inf. Attorney-General v. DabbsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1904
  2. Wayt v. GlasgowSupreme Court of Virginia · 1906
  3. State Ex Rel. v. Brown and BarnettMissouri Court of Appeals · 1925
  4. State Ex Rel. Bothwell v. GreenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1944
  5. State ex informatione Crow v. LundSupreme Court of Missouri · 1902

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

Powered by the Exa API