City of Oklahoma City v. Haskell, Governor

1910 OK 318, 112 P. 992, 27 Okla. 495, 1910 Okla. LEXIS 245
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedNovember 16, 1910
Docket1545
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 1910 OK 318 (City of Oklahoma City v. Haskell, Governor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
City of Oklahoma City v. Haskell, Governor, 1910 OK 318, 112 P. 992, 27 Okla. 495, 1910 Okla. LEXIS 245 (Okla. 1910).

Opinion

DHNN, C. J.

This is an original action in the Supreme Court' brought by the city of Oklahoma City in which a writ of mandamus is sought against the defendant, Charles N. Haskell, as Governor of the state of Oklahoma, requiring him as such official to appoint a commission to appraise the value of a strip of land which the board of park commissioners of the city of Oklahoma City desire to appropriate across certain public lands owned by the state for the location of a boulevard of the city. The proceeding is being taken, under the provisions of the chapter on eminent *496 domain (ch. 37, p. 804, Comp. Laws of Okla. 1909) which provide for the condemnation for certain purposes, of lands set apart for the use and benefit of the state for public schools, public buildings, and educational institutions, and establishes .a procedure therefor, making it the duty of the Governor to appoint three disinterested persons to appraise the value of the ground taken and the damage done the remaining part. On the Governor’s refusal to appoint the board of appraisers provided for, this action was brought to secure a writ of mandamus to compel him to do so. This Court-is without jurisdiction, for the reason that the courts of the state are without jurisdiction to control the Governor by mandamus in the exercise of his executive functions. This question was gone into, passed on, and determined in the case of State of Oklahoma ex rel. Attorney General v. A. H. Huston (infra), an opinion of tins court recently delivered, and it would be of no practical value to further discuss or reiterate the reasoning of that case. The petition is,, accordingly, dismissed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Hall v. Tirey
1972 OK 118 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1972)
Russell Petroleum Co. v. Walker
1933 OK 75 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1933)
State Ex Rel. Dunlop, State Treas. v. Cruce
1912 OK 227 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1912)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1910 OK 318, 112 P. 992, 27 Okla. 495, 1910 Okla. LEXIS 245, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-oklahoma-city-v-haskell-governor-okla-1910.