Directors of Insane Asylum v. Wolfly
Arizona Supreme Court
Mandamus. Original application. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtBarnes, J.
It will be conceded that the governor, the head of the executive department of the government, is not amenable to the judicial department by mandamus, to direct him in the exercise of any of the powers intrusted to him as such, whatever the degree or character of the discretion imposed upon him. The executive and judicial departments have separate and distinct functions, clearly marked out, and each *133is independent of the other. The authority to direct the governor by mandamus is denied by very high authority, and the difficulty of the enforcement of the writ has been suggested with great…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Kendall v. United States Ex Rel. StokesSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
- People ex rel. Harless v. HatchIllinois Supreme Court · 1863
- Harpending v. HaightCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
- People ex rel. Billings v. BissellIllinois Supreme Court · 1857
- People ex rel. Drake v. Regents of the UniversityMichigan Supreme Court · 1856
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Attorney General v. HustonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- State Ex Rel. Brotherton v. MooreWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1976
- Houtz v. Board of CommissionersWyoming Supreme Court · 1902
- General Fire Extinguisher Co. v. Northwestern Auto Supply Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1922
- Rex Beach Pictures Co. v. Harry I. Garson ProductionsMichigan Supreme Court · 1920
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.