State ex rel. Rosenheim v. Hoyt

2 Or. 246
CourtOregon Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 15, 1867
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 2 Or. 246 (State ex rel. Rosenheim v. Hoyt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon 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. Rosenheim v. Hoyt, 2 Or. 246 (Or. 1867).

Opinion

Boise, C. J.

There can be no question but the relator, in voting for himself, violated the rule above quoted, and that, without his own vote, he would not have had a majority; and if such rule were binding on the council, then the election [249]*249would be a nullity. We are of opinion that such rule was binding, and one seeking advantage from its violation, should not be permitted to gain by his own wrong. As to the other point, that the offices of councilman and marshal are incompatible and cannot be held by the same person, we think admits of no question. The marshal is the executive officer of the council, and has to settle his accounts for fees and services with that body; and it would not be competent for him to pass on his own accounts, and vote money out of the city treasury into his own pocket. It is contrary to the policy of the law for an officer to prostitute his official position by using his official appointing power to place himself in office.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Columbia County Administrative School District No. 5 Joint v. Prichard
585 P.2d 701 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1978)
State Ex Rel Hayden v. Hill
184 P.2d 366 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1947)
Commonwealth Ex Rel. McCreary v. Major
22 A.2d 686 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1941)
State Ex Rel. Schenck v. Barrett
184 A. 379 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1936)
People ex rel. Shirey v. Pearson
121 Misc. 26 (New York Supreme Court, 1923)
Wood v. Town of Whitehall
120 Misc. 124 (New York Supreme Court, 1923)
Oliver v. Brill
14 Ohio App. 312 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1921)
Lattime v. Hunt
81 N.E. 1001 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1907)
Piatt v. St. Clair's Heirs
1 Wright 261 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1833)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 Or. 246, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-rosenheim-v-hoyt-or-1867.