State v. Banks

Ohio Court of Appeals

State v. Banks

2 Ohio Law. Abs. 104, 1923 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1558

CourtOhio Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 5, 1923

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 2 Ohio Law. Abs. 104 (State v. Banks) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Banks, 2 Ohio Law. Abs. 104, 1923 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1558 (Ohio Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

FARR, J.

Epitomized Opinion

First Publication of this Opinion

This was an action in quo warranto brought in the Court of Appeals of Mahoning county to oust Banks from the position of Director of Public Safety in the city of Youngstown. The petition stated that on J'an. 1, 1922, Hamilton was appointed Safety Director and on Jan. 18, 1923, Banks was appointed Safety Director to succeeded Hamilton. A few days before this action Was brought, Banks resigned and Hamilton resumed his duties. It was urg’ed at the hearing that inasmuch as quo warranto was a proceeding by which the right to a public office was tried, the case should be determined regardless of whether Banks resigned or not. In dismissing the petition, the Court of Appeals held.

1. When Banks resigned, and Hamilton again took office, it had the same effect as though this court had entered a judgment of ouster against Banks.

2. Where the only question involved is the question of costs, the court should not continue the cause but should dismiss the action.

3. Where no substantial benefit will insure to the relator, no order will issue after the term of office has expired, merely to try the abstract title to the office.

Petition dismissed.

Banks to pay cost to date of resignation and Hamilton from that date.

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

FARR, J.

Epitomized Opinion

First Publication of this Opinion

This was an action in quo warranto brought in the Court of Appeals of Mahoning county to oust Banks from the position of Director of Public Safety in the city of Youngstown. The petition stated that on J'an. 1, 1922, Hamilton was appointed Safety Director and on Jan. 18, 1923, Banks was appointed Safety Director to succeeded Hamilton. A few days before this action Was brought, Banks resigned and Hamilton resumed his duties. It was urg’ed at the hearing that inasmuch as quo warranto was a proceeding by which the right to a public office was tried, the case should be determined regardless of whether Banks resigned or not. In dismissing the petition, the Court of Appeals held.

1. When Banks resigned, and Hamilton again took office, it had the same effect as though this court had entered a judgment of ouster against Banks.

2. Where the only question involved is the question of costs, the court should not continue the cause but should dismiss the action.

3. Where no substantial benefit will insure to the relator, no order will issue after the term of office has expired, merely to try the abstract title to the office.

Petition dismissed.

Banks to pay cost to date of resignation and Hamilton from that date.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Ohio Law. Abs. 104, 1923 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1558, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-banks-ohioctapp-1923.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack