Schulte v. Bolen

1923 OK 483, 216 P. 928, 90 Okla. 238, 1923 Okla. LEXIS 1162
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedJuly 10, 1923
Docket14467
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 1923 OK 483 (Schulte v. Bolen) 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
Schulte v. Bolen, 1923 OK 483, 216 P. 928, 90 Okla. 238, 1923 Okla. LEXIS 1162 (Okla. 1923).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an original action instituted in this court for a writ of mandamus by which W. F. Schulte, petitioner, seeks to compel Honorable J. W. Bolen, 'district judge in and for Pontotoc county, Okla., to disqualify from presiding and further proceeding in the proceedings commenced by the board of county commissioners of said county to determine the legal outstanding judgment indebtedness against Pontotoc county and for the issuance of funding bond's to pay said indebtedness. '

The petitioner, W. F. Schulte, is a resident taxpayer of Pontotoc county, Okla., and, together with others, has filed a protest and objections to the issuance of said funding bonds.

The cause was submitted to the court on the 6th day of July, 1923, upon the petition, objections to petition, and the response of the respondent to the alternative writ issued herein, and upon a careful consideration of the same it is our conclusion that the petitioner is entitled to the writ of mandamus.

*239 In order to maintain and foster proper respect and confidence of the people in the courts, the courts must be presided over by unbiased, impartial, and disinterested judges, and all doubt and suspicion to the contrary must be jealously guarded against. McCullough v. Davis, 11 Okla. Cr. 431, 147 Pac. 779; State ex rel. Warner v. Fullerton, 76 Okla. 35, 183 Pac. 979; Dennison v. Christopher, Superior Judge, 18 Okla. Cr. —, 200 Pac. 783.

For the reasons stated, it is ordered the respondent forthwith certify his disqualification as presiding judge in the cause, and upon his failure to do so the writ of mandamus will issue.

All the Justices concur, except McNEILL and KANE, JJ., not participating. ..

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

Related

Fisk v. Venable
1937 OK CR 87 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1937)
Sheldon v. Board of Education
4 P.2d 430 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1931)
Twin City Fire Ins. Co. v. First Nat. Bank
1930 OK 483 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1930)
Ex Parte Owens
1927 OK CR 171 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1927)
State Ex Rel. Attorney General v. Martin
1927 OK 147 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1927)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1923 OK 483, 216 P. 928, 90 Okla. 238, 1923 Okla. LEXIS 1162, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schulte-v-bolen-okla-1923.