State ex rel. Davis v. Davis
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On quo warranto. An information, in the nature of a quo warranto, was filed by certain persons who claim to be the legally-appointed-chosen freeholders of the county of Camden, to test the legal right of certain other persons to exercise the functions of aboard of chosen freeholders of such county. To this information, a plea has been filed. The motion is to strike out the-plea.
1Opinion of the Court
*81The opinion of the court was delivered by
Reed, J.
The information sets out the provisions of the statute of May 25th, 1894 (Pamph. L., p. 53), which statute repealed the act passed in 1892, under which act respondents-were elected chosen freeholders. It also sets out the provisions of the act of May 9th, 1894 (Pamph. L., ch. CXLV.), which act also repeals the act of 1892, and provides a new plan for the organization of the board and for the election or appointment of its members. The information further sets out the appointment of the relators as members of the board of chosen freeholders…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Stocking v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1855
3Cited by8 opinions
- Lammers v. Board of Education of Borough of Point PleasantSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1993
- State ex rel. Hawkins v. CookSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1898
- Burke v. KennyNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1950
- Manahan v. WattsSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1900
- Paull v. PierceNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1961
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.