Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

SMITH v. HALL

COURTS — Supreme Court — Original Jurisdiction — Quo Warranto. Quo warranto in the Supreme Court, brought by a private relator, contesting the right of respondent to the office of county judge, will be dismissed, where there has been no showing that the relief demanded could not be secured by an action in the district court of the district in which the county lies.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

PER CURIAM.

This is an original action filed in this court by relator, who is contesting the right of respondent to the office of county judge of Delaware county. A motion has been lodged seeking the dismissal of the action, because the same does not involve matters publici juris and is brought by a private relator, and that no showing has been made that the relief demanded could not be adequately secured by bringing the action in the district court of the district in which this county lies.

On the authority of Homesteaders v. McCombs, 24 Okla. 201, 103 P. 691, and State ex rel. v. Cobb, County Judge, 24 Okla. 662, 104 P. 361, 24 L. R. A. (N. S.) 639, the motion of counsel for respondent must be sustained, and the action is accordingly dismissed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

SMITH v. HALL
(Mar 21, 1911)