State ex rel. Murphy v. Bernier
| Decision Date | 31 May 1888 |
| Docket Number | 5,406 - (231) [2] |
| Parties | STATE ex rel. K. M. MURPHY and Another v. J. N. BERNIER and Another |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Writ of quo warranto issued from the supreme court upon an information which contained the following allegations:
That said relators, K. M. Murphy and David H. Hayes, have been since prior to the tenth day of March, 1887, trustees of the village of Mendota, in the county of Dakota, in said state which village is duly organized and incorporated under the general laws of said state therefor provided; and that said relators did duly qualify and act as such trustees, and still are such trustees, and members of said village council, and entitled to said offices, and to perform therein the duties of the same. That on the thirteenth day of March, 1888, a pretended annual election was attempted to be held in said village of Mendota, whereat said J. N. Bernier and Amede Le Clair claim to have been, and were, returned as having been elected as trustees of said village of Mendota, and members of said village council; and that said J. N. Bernier and Amede Le Clair have since qualified and acted, and have claimed to act as such officers, and have unlawfully usurped the places of said relators, as such trustees and members of said council. That, in law and in fact, said pretended election of said J. N. Bernier and Amede Le Clair, and said annual election of said village, were null and void; and that said J. N. Bernier and Amede Le Clair are not entitled to hold and exercise the functions and duties of said offices for the reasons:
First that said village council did not, as was required by law fix or designate, prior to such election, any place for holding said annual election of said village.
Second, that said council did not, at any time, appoint any judges of said election, as is provided by law.
Third, that said council did not, at any time prior to said election, designate any places in said village for the posting of notices of such election.
Fourth, that said council did not, at any time prior to said pretended election, make or file, or cause to be made or filed, as is required by law, any financial statement of the financial condition of said village.
Fifth, that said council did not, at any time, post or publish, or cause to be posted or published, as is required by law, such financial statement.
Sixth, that Austin Hallahan, Fred Le Claire, and Louis T. Le Claire assumed to act as judges of said election, and that neither and none of them can read or write the English language as is required by law that such judges of election shall do.
Seventh that at said pretended election one William F. Kertson was then and there the recorder of said village, and a candidate for reelection to said office, but that, contrary to law, he did act...
To continue reading
Request your trial