State Ex Rel. Torreyson v. James
This text of 38 P. 668 (State Ex Rel. Torreyson v. James) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
By the Court,
This is an application for an alternative writ of mandamus requiring the board of county commissioners of Storey county (respondents herein) to allow the costs of the clerk of this court incurred upon appeal in the case of State v. Trolson, 21 *264 Nev¡ 419. Respondents demurred to the petition, upon the ground that the court had no jurisdiction of the subject matter. The writ of mandamus should be resorted to only when the usual and ordinary remedies fail to afford adequate relief, and without it there would be a failure of justice. If there is an adequate remedy at law by which relief maj^ be attained it should be taken. It is clear that there is such remedy.
The principle is stated in Shelby v. Hoffman, 7 Ohio St. 450, as follows: “The writ of mandamus, at common law, was a prerogative writ, introduced to prevent discord from a failure of justice, and to be used on occasions where the law had established no specific remedy. It is, however, a general rule at common law that the writ of mandamus does not lie unless the party applying has no other adequate remedy.” See, also, High, Extr. Rem., sec. 15, and cases there cited.
Mandamus denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
38 P. 668, 22 Nev. 263, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-torreyson-v-james-nev-1895.