State ex rel. Starrett v. James

44 P. 116, 14 Wash. 82, 1896 Wash. LEXIS 311
CourtWashington Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 24, 1896
DocketNo. 1827
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 44 P. 116 (State ex rel. Starrett v. James) 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. Starrett v. James, 44 P. 116, 14 Wash. 82, 1896 Wash. LEXIS 311 (Wash. 1896).

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Scott, J.

This was a proceeding in mandamus brought by the relators, as members of the board of directors of School District No. 1 of Jefferson county, against the respondent, the third director, to compel him to sign warrants ordered issued by said board in payment of the salaries of certain teachers who [83]*83are not parties to this proceeding. The warrants had been signed by the relators. The superior court granted the alternative writ; return was made thereto, and upon the hearing the court ordered the same dissolved, and the relators have appealed.

It does not appear what reason or ground induced the court to find in favor of the respondent, and it is not material if there is any good reason why the final writ should not have issued. The respondent contends that the relators have no interest in the matter in controversy, and consequently had no right to institute the proceedings. In our opinion, this position is well taken. Such proceedings can only be brought by parties in interest. See 14 Am. & Eng. Enc. Law, p. 218, and cases cited. The action was merely to enforce a private demand, and the interested parties would be the ones who held the claims and to whom the warrants should have been issued. The relators had no such interest in the matter as would authorize them to invoke the aid of the court.

Affirmed.

Hoyt, C. J., and Anders, Dunbar and Gordon, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Robinson Township School District v. Houghton
128 A.2d 58 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1956)
Barry v. Phoenix Union High School
197 P.2d 533 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1948)
Wiecking v. State ex rel. Coachman
62 So. 898 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1913)
State ex rel. Brown v. McQuade
79 P. 207 (Washington Supreme Court, 1905)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
44 P. 116, 14 Wash. 82, 1896 Wash. LEXIS 311, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-starrett-v-james-wash-1896.