McDougal v. Guigon
Supreme Court of Virginia
In December 1875 the judge of the Hustings court •of the city of Richmond made a rule on James Mc-Dougal, John Marxhausen and E. J. Vaiden, judges of election of the first precinct of Jefferson ward of said city, to show cause why they should not be removed from their said offices as judges of election for the said precinct. The rule was made returnable to the first day of the next term.
Read the full summary
In December 1875 the judge of the Hustings court •of the city of Richmond made a rule on James Mc-Dougal, John Marxhausen and E. J. Vaiden, judges of election of the first precinct of Jefferson ward of said city, to show cause why they should not be removed from their said offices as judges of election for the said precinct. The rule was made returnable to the first day of the next term. In January 1876 James McDougal presented his petition to the Supreme Court of Appeals, in which he states that on the 20th of October 1875 he was appointed by the judge of the Hustings court of the city of…
1Opinion of the CourtStaples, J.
This is an application for a writ of prohibition-The object is to restrain the judge of the Hustings court of the city of Richmond from removing the petitioner from the office to which he was appointed on the 20th October 1875, as a judge of elections for *135the first precinct of Jefferson ward in said city. The petitioner avers, that the appointment vested in him the right* and made it his duty under the law, to said office for the space of one year; and placed it beyond the power of any tribunal to remove him therefrom, except upon conviction by a jury, of willful neglect of bis duty, or of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Commonwealth ex rel. Lehman v. SutherlandSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1817