Hester's Case
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
applied to the court to award a mandamus to the commissioners of the county of Philadelphia to pay the amount of a bill alleged to be due to the complainant by them for carrying prisoners to and from the jail and court, during the sitting of the Court of General Sessions.
1Per curiam
The established rule of law which has been constantly recognised and acted on by this court, is, that a mandamus will not be granted where there is a specific remedy by action. Commonwealth v. Rosseter, (2 Binn. 362). To determine whether the county commissioners are bound to pay this bill, the party has a remedy by action. He must first sue the county commissioners, and recover against them, before he can apply here for a mandamus.
Motion refused.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Commonwealth v. RosseterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1810
3Cited by7 opinions
- Homan v. MacKeySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Wheelock v. Auditor of Suffolk CountyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1881
- Overseers of Porter Township v. Overseers of Jersey ShoreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1876
- Commonwealth ex rel. O'Connor v. McCuenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1874
- Adams v. County Commissioners of HampdenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1860
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.