Opinion · Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Maverick Oil Company v. Hanson

Maverick Oil Co. v. Hanson, 67 N.H. 203 (N.H. 1892)

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Jurisdiction
New Hampshire
Date
1892-06-05
Topic
general

Chase, J. This is not a proper proceeding to determine Hanson’s right to the office in question. It should have been an information in the nature of quo warranto, or a petition therefor brought in the name of the attorney-general as representative of the state. Osgood v. Jones, 60 N.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Maverick Oil Company v. Hanson. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
2 opinions
Chase, J.

This is not a proper proceeding to determine Hanson’s right to the office in question. It should have been an information in the nature of quo warranto, or a petition therefor brought in the name of the attorney-general as representative of the state. Osgood v. Jones, 60 N. H. 543. As Hanson is an officer de facto, at least (Jewell v. Gilbert, 64 N. H. 13), it does not appear that there is any occasion for a mandamus to fill the office by a new appointment and incidentally fix the appointee’s compensation.

Petition dismissed.

Carpenter, J., did not sit: the others concurred.