State ex rel. Coiner v. Wickersham

47 P. 421, 16 Wash. 161, 1896 Wash. LEXIS 27
CourtWashington Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 11, 1896
DocketNo. 2086
StatusPublished
Cited by21 cases

This text of 47 P. 421 (State ex rel. Coiner v. Wickersham) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Washington Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State ex rel. Coiner v. Wickersham, 47 P. 421, 16 Wash. 161, 1896 Wash. LEXIS 27 (Wash. 1896).

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Anders, J.

This was a proceeding by information instituted by the prosecuting attorney of Pierce county, under chapter 10, title 9, of the Code of Procedure to oust the respondent from the office of city attorney for the city of Tacoma. We will not consider the merits of the case for the reason that it appeared, when it came on for argument in this court, that the respondent had previously been appointed city attorney by the mayor of the city, and the appointment had been confirmed by the city council, and that the respondent was therefore legally in office under the provisions of the city charter.

If it be conceded that the judgment appealed from was wrong and should be reversed, still the judgment prescribed by § 688 of the code, which is that of ouster, cannot be given against the respondent, and a reversal of the judgment would therefore be futile. If the plaintiff was entitled to the relief demanded, or any relief, when the proceeding was commenced, such right has ceased to exist, and in such cases a motion to dismiss the appeal will be granted. Cutcomp v. Utt, 60 Iowa, 156 (14 N. W. 214); State v. Porter, 58 Iowa, 19 (11 N. W. 715); Little v. Bowers, 134 U. S. 547 (10 Sup. Ct. 620); Washington Market Co. v. District of Columbia, 137 U. S. 62 (11 Sup. Ct. 4).

The appeal is dismissed on the respondent’s motion.

Hoyt, C. J., and Scott and Gordon, JJ., concur.

Dunbar, J.—I think appellant should recover costs.

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

Related

Cotton v. City of Elma
998 P.2d 339 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 2000)
NAT'L ELEC. ETC. v. Seattle Sch. Dist.
400 P.2d 778 (Washington Supreme Court, 1965)
In Re Bronson's Estate
55 P.2d 1075 (Washington Supreme Court, 1936)
Scott v. Ward
54 P.2d 805 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1936)
State Ex Rel. Burnham v. Superior Court
41 P.2d 155 (Washington Supreme Court, 1935)
Barber Asphalt Paving Co. v. Hamilton
141 P. 199 (Washington Supreme Court, 1914)
Wilson v. Fraser
121 P. 829 (Washington Supreme Court, 1912)
Mackay v. Dever
95 P. 860 (Washington Supreme Court, 1908)
Trumbull v. Jefferson County
79 P. 1105 (Washington Supreme Court, 1905)
Jones v. Miller
77 P. 811 (Washington Supreme Court, 1904)
State ex rel. Land v. Christopher
72 P. 709 (Washington Supreme Court, 1903)
Hewitt v. Root
71 P. 1021 (Washington Supreme Court, 1903)
State ex rel. Bauer v. Sunset Telephone & Telegraph Co.
71 P. 198 (Washington Supreme Court, 1903)
State ex rel. Taylor v. Cummings
67 P. 565 (Washington Supreme Court, 1902)
Sether v. Clark
63 P. 1106 (Washington Supreme Court, 1901)
Wood v. City of Seattle
52 L.R.A. 369 (Washington Supreme Court, 1900)
Watson v. Merkle
59 P. 484 (Washington Supreme Court, 1899)
Lynde v. Dibble
53 P. 370 (Washington Supreme Court, 1898)
In re Kaeppler
75 N.W. 253 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1898)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
47 P. 421, 16 Wash. 161, 1896 Wash. LEXIS 27, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-coiner-v-wickersham-wash-1896.