State ex rel. Corwin v. Markley

Supreme Court of New Jersey

State ex rel. Corwin v. Markley

25 A. 260, 55 N.J.L. 107, 26 Vroom 107, 1892 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 7

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided November 15, 1892·Published·Cited by 11 cases

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Dixon, J.

Immediately after the passage of the resolution of March 22d, 1892, considered in Markley v: The Borough-of Cape May Point, the council of the borough appointed the-relator to fill the alleged vacancy in the office of borough collector, and he now asks for a mandamus- directing the respondent to deliver to him the official money and property.

[108]*108As we have adjudged the resolution to be illegal, it follows that the respondent was still lawfully entitled to the office, =and the appointment of the relator was invalid. Of course, •therefore, the mandamus cannot be allowed.

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

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Dixon, J.

Immediately after the passage of the resolution of March 22d, 1892, considered in Markley v: The Borough-of Cape May Point, the council of the borough appointed the-relator to fill the alleged vacancy in the office of borough collector, and he now asks for a mandamus- directing the respondent to deliver to him the official money and property.

[108]*108As we have adjudged the resolution to be illegal, it follows that the respondent was still lawfully entitled to the office, =and the appointment of the relator was invalid. Of course, •therefore, the mandamus cannot be allowed.

State ex rel. Corwin v. Markley, 25 A. 260, 55 N.J.L. 107, 26 Vroom 107, 1892 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 7 (N.J. 1892).

Pincite

25 A. 260 (State ex rel. Corwin v. Markley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related