Frittz v. Thorpe

1931 OK 303, 299 P. 884, 149 Okla. 219, 1931 Okla. LEXIS 228
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedJune 2, 1931
Docket21952
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 1931 OK 303 (Frittz v. Thorpe) 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
Frittz v. Thorpe, 1931 OK 303, 299 P. 884, 149 Okla. 219, 1931 Okla. LEXIS 228 (Okla. 1931).

Opinion

HEFNER, J.

This is a proceeding in quo warranto brought in the district court of Texas county by George M. Frittz, county attorney,, against Joe. H. Thorpe, S. S. Sullivan, and W. D. Waldrop, director, clerk, and member, respectively, of consolidated school district No. 15 of Texas county, and questions their right to hold their respective *220 offices. Tfie canse, of! action is' based on the theory that the consolidated district was irregularly organized. On the same day plaintiff’s petition was filed, O. G. Westmore-land and others, as taxpayers of the school district, were granted leave to intervene.

In their petition interveners attacked the right of respondents to hold office on the same ground as alleged in plain.iffs petition. Demurrer to plaintiff’s petition was sustained. Thereafter, on motion of defendants, the petition of interveners was stricken. This ruling is assigned as error. The identical question here involved was passed upon by this court in the case of Sugart v. Thorpe, 147 Okla. 152, 295 Pac. 605. It is there said:

“Private individuals, who have only a general public interest, cannot maintain an action as interveners in quo warranto against a consolidated school district, although taxpayers thereof, even though the Attorney General or the county attorney decline to institute or prosecute an action.”

This case is decisive of the question here involved.

Judgment is affirmed.

CLARK, V. O. J., and RILEY, OULLISON, SWINDALL, and McNEILL, JJ., concur. KORNEGAY, J., dissents. LESTER, C. J., and ANDREWS, J.„ absent.

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

Related

State ex rel. Board of Regents v. McCloskey Brothers, Inc.
2009 OK 90 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 2009)
STATE EX REL. REGENTS v. McCLOSKEY BROS.
2009 OK 90 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 2009)
Hendrick v. Walters
1993 OK 162 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1993)
Wagoner County Election Board v. Plunkett
1956 OK 329 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1956)
Robison v. Chapman
1932 OK 507 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1932)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1931 OK 303, 299 P. 884, 149 Okla. 219, 1931 Okla. LEXIS 228, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frittz-v-thorpe-okla-1931.