Becker v. Stanley

Indiana Supreme Court

Becker v. Stanley

92 N.E.2d 851, 228 Ind. 429, 1950 Ind. LEXIS 154

CourtIndiana Supreme Court

DecidedJune 14, 1950

DocketNo. O-96.

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 92 N.E.2d 851 (Becker v. Stanley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Becker v. Stanley, 92 N.E.2d 851, 228 Ind. 429, 1950 Ind. LEXIS 154 (Ind. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

Starr, J.

This is an original action in this Court.

The petitioner herein seeks an alternate writ of mandate to compel the said Merton B. Stanley, as Judge of the Howard Circuit Court, to hear the petitioner’s alleged application for the restoration of his sanity now pending in the said Court. The action herein is brought in the petitioner’s own name and not in the name of the State of Indiana on his relation, as required by § 3-2201, Burns’ 1946 Replacement. The provision of this statute is mandatory and it is legally impossible for an action of mandate to be prosecuted by one in his individual and personal capacity. For this reason alone this petition should be denied. Bd. of Public Safety v. Walling (1934), 206 Ind. 540, 187 N. E. 385; Rogers v. Youngblood, Judge (1948), 226 Ind. 165, 78 N. E. 2d 663. Furthermore, the petition herein fails to allege that a copy of the petitioner’s said application for the restoration of his sanity has been served by him upon the Attorney General as required by § 49-1937, Burns’ 1933 (1949 *431 Supp.), nor does this petition contain, or have attached as exhibits, “certified copies of all pleadings, orders and entries pertaining to the subject matter” in the Howard Circuit Court as required by Rule 2-35 of this Court.

For all the foregoing reasons the petition is denied.

note.—Reported in 92 N. E. 2d 851.

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

Starr, J.

This is an original action in this Court.

The petitioner herein seeks an alternate writ of mandate to compel the said Merton B. Stanley, as Judge of the Howard Circuit Court, to hear the petitioner’s alleged application for the restoration of his sanity now pending in the said Court. The action herein is brought in the petitioner’s own name and not in the name of the State of Indiana on his relation, as required by § 3-2201, Burns’ 1946 Replacement. The provision of this statute is mandatory and it is legally impossible for an action of mandate to be prosecuted by one in his individual and personal capacity. For this reason alone this petition should be denied. Bd. of Public Safety v. Walling (1934), 206 Ind. 540, 187 N. E. 385; Rogers v. Youngblood, Judge (1948), 226 Ind. 165, 78 N. E. 2d 663. Furthermore, the petition herein fails to allege that a copy of the petitioner’s said application for the restoration of his sanity has been served by him upon the Attorney General as required by § 49-1937, Burns’ 1933 (1949 *431 Supp.), nor does this petition contain, or have attached as exhibits, “certified copies of all pleadings, orders and entries pertaining to the subject matter” in the Howard Circuit Court as required by Rule 2-35 of this Court.

For all the foregoing reasons the petition is denied.

note.—Reported in 92 N. E. 2d 851.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

92 N.E.2d 851, 228 Ind. 429, 1950 Ind. LEXIS 154, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/becker-v-stanley-ind-1950.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack