Nolen v. State ex rel. Moore

118 Ala. 154
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedNovember 15, 1897
StatusPublished
Cited by28 cases

This text of 118 Ala. 154 (Nolen v. State ex rel. Moore) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Nolen v. State ex rel. Moore, 118 Ala. 154 (Ala. 1897).

Opinion

McCLELLAN, J.

A tax assessor can be removed from office only in the mode prescribed by the organic law, that is, by impeachment under section 3, Article VII of the Constitution.

That provision of the act of February 28, 1887 (Acts, 1886-87, p. 1), which undertakes to authorize the Governor to “suspend” tax assessors, and to appoint tax [159]*159commissioners to perform the duties of assessors so “suspended,” and providing that such suspension of an assessor shall continue indefinitely, or, more accurately speaking, perpetually, “unless the General Assembly by joint resolution restore him to his office,” is violative of the Constitution and void. The “suspension” provided for is in legal contemplation essentially a removal from office, accomplished, if held to be effective, without impeachment and without the semblance of a trial by jury or otherwise.

As to the procedure in this case: It is manifest that the respondent is in the office, and discharging all the duties of the office from which the relator was thus removed; and it is of no sort of consequence that he is styled “tax commissioner,” instead of “tax assessor,” which .latter in truth and in fact he is under the act; and the relator has properly resorted to the writ of quo loarranto in respect of the respondent’s actual incumbency of the office which the relator is entitled to hold.

We concur in the conclusion reached by the judge of the circuit court; and the judgment must be affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Related

City of Birmingham v. Graffeo
551 So. 2d 357 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1989)
Carter v. State Ex Rel. Bullock County
393 So. 2d 1368 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1981)
State Ex Rel. Bozeman v. Hester
72 So. 2d 61 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1954)
State ex rel. Green v. Collison
197 A. 836 (Superior Court of Delaware, 1938)
Tucker v. State Ex Rel. Poole
165 So. 249 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1935)
Owens v. City Council of Troy
157 So. 865 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1934)
Springer v. State Ex Rel. Williams
157 So. 219 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1934)
Bradford v. State Ex Rel. Esslinger
147 So. 182 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1933)
Wentz v. Thomas
1932 OK 636 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1932)
State Ex Rel. Moore v. Blake
142 So. 418 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1932)
Brassell v. Brandon
135 So. 577 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1931)
State Ex Rel. Williams v. Owens
117 So. 298 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1928)
Phelps v. Connellee
278 S.W. 939 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1925)
Stone v. State Ex Rel. Freeland
104 So. 892 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1925)
Stone v. State Ex Rel. Freeland
104 So. 894 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1925)
Petree v. McMurray
98 So. 782 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1923)
Leonard v. Lyons
87 So. 99 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1920)
Franklin County v. Richardson
79 So. 384 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1918)
Harrington v. State Ex Rel. Van Hayes
76 So. 422 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1917)
Williams v. Schwarz
72 So. 330 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1916)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
118 Ala. 154, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nolen-v-state-ex-rel-moore-ala-1897.