State ex rel. Anderson v. Neumann

• Decision Date: 28 November 1888
• Parties: STATE EX REL. ANDERSON v. NEUMANN ET AL., COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.
• Court: Nebraska Supreme Court

25 Neb. 35

40 N.W. 603

STATE EX REL. ANDERSON

v.NEUMANN ET AL., COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.

Supreme Court of Nebraska.

November 28, 1888.

Syllabus by the Court.

The defendants constitute the board of county commissioners of Cheyenne county. Petitions were filed in the proper offices of said county, praying the submission of the question of its subdivision and the erection of new counties. Among them was the petition of the relator and others, for the submission of the question of the erection of Potter county. The board refused to act upon his petition, and he applied to the supreme court for a writ of mandamus to compel action upon the submission of an interlocutory question. It was held by the court that it was their duty to act. Soon after that decision, the board acted upon the petition, finding that it was not signed by the requisite number of electors to entitle them to its submission. The other proposition being submitted, the county was subdivided, without regard to the question mentioned in the petition named. It was held that, the objects of the writ of mandamus being only to compel action, relators were not entitled to the writ, but that they were entitled to recover all costs made on account of the proceeding for mandamus, prior to the action of the county board.

Mandamus.

Petition by Charles Anderson for mandamus to A. G. Neumann and others, county commissioners of Cheyenne county, to compel them to submit to the electors of the county the proposition to erect a new county. For former opinion, see 38 N. W. Rep. 40.Robert Ryan, for relator.

Heist & Rayner and J. W. Norvell, for respondents.

REESE, C. J.

This was an application for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel the county commissioners of Cheyenne county to call an election for the purpose of submitting to the voters of said county the question of the erection of a new county, to be called “Potter County.” A demurrer to the application was presented and argued at the January term of this court. The demurrer was overruled. No further reference need be made to it than to cite the report of the case, which is found in State v. County Com'rs, 38 N. W. Rep. 40. Upon the demurrer being overruled, defendants acted upon the petition, which had been submitted, and found that it had not been signed by the requisite number of electors of the territory described as the proposed new county. It appears by the records on file in the case, and admissions of the counsel during the...