State Ex Rel. McTaggart v. Middleton
This text of 28 P.2d 186 (State Ex Rel. McTaggart v. Middleton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Montana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
— The application for an alternative writ of mandate is denied. The court is asked to look behind the enrolled bill which received the signature of the Speaker of the House, of the Lieutenant Governor as President of the Senate, and the approval of the Governor, in order to correct an error made during the progress of the bill before it came to the presiding officers of the respective Houses for signature. For us this subject is foreclosed; this court can look behind the enrolled bill for one purpose only, and that is to see whether *608 the constitutional mandate requiring that on the final passage of a measure the vote has been taken by ayes and noes, and the names of those voting have been entered on the journal. (Art. V, sec. 24; Palatine Ins. Co. v. Northern Pacific R. Co., 34 Mont. 268, 85 Pac. 1032, 9 Ann. Cas. 579; State ex rel. Gregg v. Erickson, 39 Mont. 280, 102 Pac. 336; Barth v. Pock, 51 Mont. 418, 155 Pac. 282; State ex rel. Woodward v. Moulton, 57 Mont. 414, 189 Pac. 59; Martien v. Porter, 68 Mont. 450, 219 Pac. 817.)
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
28 P.2d 186, 94 Mont. 607, 1933 Mont. LEXIS 104, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-mctaggart-v-middleton-mont-1933.