Caffrey v. Caffrey
Citations
- 28 Pa. Super. 22
- 1905 Pa. Super. LEXIS 126
Syllabus
<p>Mandamus — School law — Director—Quo warranto.</p> <p>Mandamus will not lie in favor of a person claiming the office of school director, where another person is actually in the office, and is recognized as a director by the other members of the board. In such a case the remedy is by quo warranto in which the rights of the incumbent may be determined.</p>
Judges: Beaver, Henderson, Morrison, Orlady, Porter, Rice
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
4 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Bentman v. Seventh Ward Democratic Executive CommitteeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1966-03-22· cited 40×
- Commonwealth ex rel. District Attorney v. GibsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1934-11-26· cited 12×
- Gernert v. LINDSAYCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania· 1971-08-10· cited 7×
- Commonwealth ex rel. Radzievich v. Davis & Minersville Borough CouncilSchuylkill County Court of Common Pleas· 1928-04-23
Cites
8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Biggs v. McBrideOregon Supreme Court· 1889-06-20· cited 66×
- Hagner v. HeybergerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1844-03-15· cited 30×
- Commonwealth ex rel. Century Co. v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1896-07-15· cited 29×
- Harwood v. MarshallCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1856-06-15· cited 26×
- Appeal of GilroySupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1882-03-13· cited 16×
- Goldsworthy v. BoyleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1896-04-27· cited 10×
- People ex rel. Lockwood v. ScrughamNew York Supreme Court· 1855-08-06· cited 8×
- Commonwealth ex rel. Heisey v. RisserSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1896-12-07· cited 5×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.