Baker v. Cushman

127 Mass. 105, 1879 Mass. LEXIS 28
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedJune 27, 1879
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 127 Mass. 105 (Baker v. Cushman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Baker v. Cushman, 127 Mass. 105, 1879 Mass. LEXIS 28 (Mass. 1879).

Opinion

Gray, C. J.

Whether we look to the record only, or to the facts found by the judge before whom this petition, was heard, it does not appear that there was a complete election of the petitioner to the office of city clerk; but it does appear that the vote by which he appeared to be elected was immediately declared void, and the convention at once proceeded to another vote, in which all the members took part, resulting in the election of the respondent, and he was accordingly declared to be elected. It was within the lawful power of the convention, at the same meeting, and before the result of the election had been declared, to treat the proceedings already had as irregular and invalid, and to vote anew. The petitioner therefore acquired no right to the office. State v. Foster, 2 Halst. 101. As this view is decisive of the case, it is unnecessary to consider the other objections to the issue of a writ of mandamus.

Petition dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State Ex Rel. Johnson v. Hagemeister
73 N.W.2d 625 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1955)
State Ex Rel. Kempson v. Moore
67 S.W.2d 151 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1934)
Board of Education of Boyle County v. McChesney
32 S.W.2d 26 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1930)
Mansfield v. O'Brien
171 N.E. 487 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1930)
Witherspoon v. State Ex Rel. West
103 So. 134 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1925)
People ex rel. MacMahon v. Davis
120 N.E. 326 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1918)
Pevey v. Aylward
91 N.E. 315 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1910)
State Ex Rel. Scofield v. Starr
63 A. 512 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1906)
Stiles v. City of Lambertville
62 A. 288 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1905)
Attorney General ex rel. Dust v. Oakman
126 Mich. 717 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1901)
Reed v. School Committee of Deerfield
57 N.E. 961 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1900)
Gouldey v. City Council of Atlantic City
42 A. 852 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1899)
State v. Phillips
11 A. 274 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1887)
State ex rel. Coogan v. Barbour
22 A. 686 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1885)
Putnam v. Langley
133 Mass. 204 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1882)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
127 Mass. 105, 1879 Mass. LEXIS 28, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baker-v-cushman-mass-1879.