Maverick Oil Company v. Hanson

29 A. 461, 67 N.H. 203
CourtSupreme Court of New Hampshire
DecidedJune 5, 1892
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 29 A. 461 (Maverick Oil Company v. Hanson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Maverick Oil Company v. Hanson, 29 A. 461, 67 N.H. 203 (N.H. 1892).

Opinion

Chase, J.

This is not a proper proceeding to determine Hanson’s right to the office in question. It should have been an information in the nature of quo warranto, or a petition therefor brought in the name of the attorney-general as representative of the state. Osgood v. Jones, 60 N. H. 543. As Hanson is an officer de facto, at least (Jewell v. Gilbert, 64 N. H. 13), it does not appear that there is any occasion for a mandamus to fill the office by a new appointment and incidentally fix the appointee’s compensation.

Petition dismissed.

Carpenter, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

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

Related

Díaz Navarro v. Kern
26 P.R. 32 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
29 A. 461, 67 N.H. 203, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maverick-oil-company-v-hanson-nh-1892.