McDermott v. Lapham

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

McDermott v. Lapham

27 A. 220, 18 R.I. 295, 1893 R.I. LEXIS 29

DecidedJune 3, 1893

StatusPublished

This text of 27 A. 220 (McDermott v. Lapham) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McDermott v. Lapham, 27 A. 220, 18 R.I. 295, 1893 R.I. LEXIS 29 (R.I. 1893).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We are of the opinion that the question whether or not a list of names from which supervisors are'to be selected is presented by a proper' town committee, is not a jurisdictional fact, and therefore not reviewable on a petition for a writ of certiorari. The statute, Pub. Laws E. I. cap. 920, § 16, of May 1, 1891, makes it the peremptory duty of the town council to appoint supervisors who shall be of the opposite political parties ; the provision that they are to be selected from a 'list presented by the town committees of the opposite political parties appears to be incidental to the appointment as affording a convenient mode of furnishing names to the council from which to make a selection. It would apparently be their duty to make the appointment whether the lists were presented to them or not.

Petition denied and dismissed.

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

Per Curiam.

We are of the opinion that the question whether or not a list of names from which supervisors are'to be selected is presented by a proper' town committee, is not a jurisdictional fact, and therefore not reviewable on a petition for a writ of certiorari. The statute, Pub. Laws E. I. cap. 920, § 16, of May 1, 1891, makes it the peremptory duty of the town council to appoint supervisors who shall be of the opposite political parties ; the provision that they are to be selected from a 'list presented by the town committees of the opposite political parties appears to be incidental to the appointment as affording a convenient mode of furnishing names to the council from which to make a selection. It would apparently be their duty to make the appointment whether the lists were presented to them or not.

Petition denied and dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 A. 220, 18 R.I. 295, 1893 R.I. LEXIS 29, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcdermott-v-lapham-ri-1893.