State v. Allyn
| Decision Date | 17 November 1893 |
| Citation | 7 Wash. 285,34 P. 914 |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE EX REL. HINCHEY v. ALLYN. |
Mandamus on the relation of Thomas Hinchey against Frank Allyn, ex-superior judge. Writ denied.
A judge of a superior court, whose term expired on the second Monday of January, 1893, cannot be thereafter compelled by mandamus to settle and certify a statement of facts; Act Jan. 21, 1893, only authorizing, and not requiring, such action by an ex judge.
Stephen O'Brien, for petitioner.
A judge of a superior court, whose term of office expired on the second Monday of January, 1893, cannot be required by mandamus to settle and certify a statement of facts on appeal, after the expiration of his term. The act of January 21, 1893, does not purport to do more than to authorize the ex-judges to settle and certify. It does not, and could not, require them to do anything. The application for a writ in this case is therefore denied.
For the reasons stated by me in Faulconer v. Warner, 2 Wash. St. 525, 27 P. 274, I am of the opinion that prior to the passage of the act of January 21, 1893, it was the duty of a judge whose office had expired to settle statements of facts in cases tried before him. But, as I feel bound by the majority opinion in that case, I concur in the disposition of this application, on the ground set forth in the foregoing opinion of Judge STILES.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Priddy v. Gibson
...Smith v. Baugh, 32 Ind. 163; Phelps v. Conant, 30 Vt. 277; DeHaas v. Circuit Judge, 46 Mich. 12; Leach v. Aitken, 91 Cal. 484; State ex rel. v. Allyn, 7 Wash. 285. (3) The relators' laches is of itself sufficient preclude the issuance of a peremptory writ. Spelling, Injunctions and Other Ex......
-
State v. Gibson
...De Haas v. Newaygo, 46 Mich. 12, 8 N. W. 587; Phelps v. Conant, 30 Vt. 277; Leach v. Aitken, 91 Cal. 484, 28 Pac. 777; State ex rel. v. Allyn, 7 Wash. 285, 34 Pac. 914. And see authorities collated by Goode, J., in Patterson v. Yancey, 97 Mo. App., loc. cit. 688, 71 S. W. 845 et seq. There ......
-
Hallam v. Tillinghast
... ... the effect or result of several cases is to decide the ... principle in favor of the respondent. In State v ... Allyn, 7 Wash. 285, 34 P. 914, which was an application ... for a mandamus to compel an ex-judge to settle and certify a ... ...
-
Montana Ore-Purchasing Co. v. Lindsay
...it does not enjoin such settlement and signing upon him as a duty. The cases of Leach v. Aitken, 91 Cal. 484, 28 P. 777, and State v. Allyn, 7 Wash. 285, 34 P. 914, fully support the position of the defendant. We shall follow them, however, for they seem to be based upon a misconception of ......