Cortright v. State ex rel. Alexander

Indiana Supreme Court

Cortright v. State ex rel. Alexander

47 N.E. 1112, 148 Ind. 706, 1897 Ind. LEXIS 269

CourtIndiana Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 28, 1897

DocketNo. 18,351

StatusPublished

This text of 47 N.E. 1112 (Cortright v. State ex rel. Alexander) 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

Cortright v. State ex rel. Alexander, 47 N.E. 1112, 148 Ind. 706, 1897 Ind. LEXIS 269 (Ind. 1897).

Pincite

Opinion

Jordan, J.

Appellant is a township trustee of Blackford county, Indiana, and relators are also trustees of that'county. He refused to meet with them on the first Monday in June, 1897, for the purpose of appointing a county superintendent, and a peremptory writ of mandate was awarded by the court requiring him to meet with the relators on the 23d day of June, 1897, for the aforesaid purpose.

The same facts and questions as were involved in Wampler v. State, ex rel., ante, 557, are presented by this appeal. On the authority of the decision in that case, the contention of counsel for appellant herein cannot be sustained, and the judgment of the lower court is therefore affirmed.

The same order as was made in the cause of Wampler v. State, ex rel., supra, is directed to be entered in this cause, and the clerk of this court will certify accordingly.

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

Jordan, J.

Appellant is a township trustee of Blackford county, Indiana, and relators are also trustees of that'county. He refused to meet with them on the first Monday in June, 1897, for the purpose of appointing a county superintendent, and a peremptory writ of mandate was awarded by the court requiring him to meet with the relators on the 23d day of June, 1897, for the aforesaid purpose.

The same facts and questions as were involved in Wampler v. State, ex rel., ante, 557, are presented by this appeal. On the authority of the decision in that case, the contention of counsel for appellant herein cannot be sustained, and the judgment of the lower court is therefore affirmed.

The same order as was made in the cause of Wampler v. State, ex rel., supra, is directed to be entered in this cause, and the clerk of this court will certify accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 N.E. 1112, 148 Ind. 706, 1897 Ind. LEXIS 269, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cortright-v-state-ex-rel-alexander-ind-1897.