1. QUO WARRANTO.
When a private litigant brings quo warranto, acting independently and not on relation of the state, burden is on him to show right to office by a preponderance of the evidence, which must be clear and dependable since presumption of right rests with occupant of office.
2. APPEAL AND ERROR.
In quo warranto proceeding involving contest over school trustee position, suggestion of error was overruled where minutes of city board relating to school trustees and terms for past 20 years were in such state of confusion that Supreme Court was unable to say with confidence that conclusions of trial court were incorrect.
Griffith, J., delivered the opinion on the suggestion of error.
This is a proceeding in quo warranto prosecuted by the appellant personally, and involves a contest over the position of school trustee in the City of Biloxi. When a private litigant brings quo warranto, acting independently and not on the relation of the state, the burden of proof is upon him to show his right to the office by a preponderance of the evidence; and the nature of the evidence must be clear and dependable, since in such case the presumption of right rests with the occupant of the office. We affirmed the judgment on the former submission without a written opinion, and now write only to say that a thorough re-examination of the record shows that the minutes of the city board in regard to school trustees and their terms going back for twenty years are in such a state of uncertainty, not to say confusion, that we are unable to say with confidence that the conclusions of the trial judge were incorrect.
Suggestion of error overruled.