State ex rel. Norfolk Beet-Sugar Co. v. Moore
Nebraska Supreme Court
Original application for mandamus to compel the auditor of public accounts to issue- a warrant in payment of relator’s claim for bounty on beet-sugar, under chapter 1, Session Laws of 1895. The,facts are stated in the commissioner’s opinion, Where a producer of sugar accepts the offer of a bounty from the state and complies with the statute, it would seem to be as much of a contract as it is possible for any citizen to make with the government.
Read the full summary
Original application for mandamus to compel the auditor of public accounts to issue- a warrant in payment of relator’s claim for bounty on beet-sugar, under chapter 1, Session Laws of 1895. The,facts are stated in the commissioner’s opinion, Where a producer of sugar accepts the offer of a bounty from the state and complies with the statute, it would seem to be as much of a contract as it is possible for any citizen to make with the government. All the elements, of a contract are present, — the terms, the consideration, and the lawful object. (Calder v. Henderson, 54 Fed. Rep., 802.) A state…
1Opinion of the Court
Irvine, C.
This is an original application for a writ of mandamus to compel the respondent, the auditor of public accounts, to draw a warrant in favor of the relator. The right to the warrant is claimed by virtue of “An act to provide for the encouragement of the manfacture of sugar and chicory, and to provide a compensation therefor.” (Session Laws, 1895, ch. 1.) By the first section of this act it is provided “that there shall be paid out of the state treasury to any person, firm, or corporation engaged in the manufacture of sugar in this state from beets, sorghum, or other sugar-yielding…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- People ex rel. McCauley & Tevis v. BrooksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Carr v. State ex rel. CoetlosquetIndiana Supreme Court · 1891
- Ristine v. State ex rel. Board of Commissioners of the Sinking FundIndiana Supreme Court · 1863
- Humbert v. DunnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Reynolds v. TaylorSupreme Court of Alabama · 1869
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by54 opinions
- Colorado General Assembly v. LammSupreme Court of Colorado · 1985
- Edwards v. ChildersSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
- Slama v. Attorney GeneralMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1981
- Rein v. JohnsonNebraska Supreme Court · 1947
- Cassibry v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1981
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.