State ex rel. Cooper Cnty. v. Trent
| Decision Date | 31 January 1875 |
| Citation | 58 Mo. 571 |
| Parties | STATE OF MISSOURI, ex rel. COOPER COUNTY, Respondent, v. WILSON W. TRENT, Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Cooper Circuit Court.
Hayden & Tompkins, for Appellant.
I. Mandamus will not lie against a mere private person, not exercising or claiming to exercise the functions of some office or trust in which the public is interested. (Dunklin Co. vs. District Ct., 23 Mo., 449; Hussey vs. Holland, 5 Kan., 462; High Extra Leg. Rem., § 1 et seq., and § 78; People vs. Stephens, 5 Hill, 616; State vs. Scofield, 41 Mo., 38.)
Draffin & Williams, for Respondent.
I. Mandamus was proper. (Mos. Mand., 153; St. Luke's Church, etc., vs. Slack, 7 Cush., 226; Dunklin County vs. District Court, 23 Mo., 449.)
The only question worthy of consideration in this case, is whether a writ of mandamus lies against one, who, having been employed by the County Court to make a survey of all the public roads of the county, and to plat them in a suitable book, does so, and after receiving the contract price for his services, regains possession of the book and refuses to deliver the same.
The Circuit Court awarded a peremptory writ for the delivery of the book, and this ruling, together with all the intermediate steps, which led the way to such result, are assigned for error. As indicated at the outset, however, the propriety of the conclusion reached, will be the only point on which our attention will be centred. An examination of the authorities shows that, although the granting of the writ referred to is of common occurrence, where there is no other specific legal remedy, in case an ex-officer, whether of a public or a private corporation, company, church, or society, or the executor or widow of such officer, refuses upon demand made, to deliver to his successor in office, the insignia, books, papers, etc., pertaining to such office, (Town Clerk of Nottingham's Case, Sid., 31; Anon., 1 Barn., 402; Rex vs. Wildman, 2 Stra., 879; The King vs. Ingram, 1 W. Be., 50; Rex vs. Chapham, 1 Wils.; Walter vs. Haynes, 24 Vt., 658; The People vs. Killduff, 15 Ill., 492; The People vs. Head, 25 Id., 325; Bun vs. Norton, 25 Conn., 103) yet the most thorough research has signally failed to discover a single instance, where a mere private person, as in the case at bar, has ever been held answerable in such a method of procedure for books of a public nature, which were detained by him.
On the other hand, authority has been found, in full accord with our impression on the argument of the cause, that as regards a person holding no official or quasi official station, mandamus would not lie. (...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Gallagher v. Kansas City
...to him of the books and papers belonging to his office by his predecessor in office, who has refused his demand therefor. [State ex rel. v. Trent, 58 Mo. 571.]" In the foregoing we have suggested the only cases wherein mandamus can be used. Those instances are, (1) where the relator holds t......
-
State ex rel. Gallagher v. Kansas City
...to him of the books and papers belonging to his office by his predecessor in office, who has refused his demand therefor. [State ex rel. v. Trent, 58 Mo. 571.]" In foregoing we have suggested the only cases wherein mandamus can be used. Those instances are, (1) where the relator holds the u......
-
State ex rel. Guion v. Miles
...which may be called, in default of a better term, a 'quasi-office,' namely that of a nominated candidate." This court in State ex rel. v. Trent, 58 Mo. 571, recognized that there might be positions which could be properly denominated quasi-official stations. In that case the respondent had ......
-
State ex rel. Cannon v. May
... ... 584; State v. Williams, 35 Mo.App. 541; ... Foster v. Blount, 18 Ala. 687; State v. Cooper, ... 5 Day, 250; Commonwealth v. Wyman, 8 Met. 247; ... United States v. Briggs, 9 How. 351; ... wrongfully withheld from it by respondent. State v ... Trent, 58 Mo. 571, and cases cited; State v ... Saxon, 25 Fla. 792; s. c., 6 So. 858; Driscoll v ... ...