Kimball v. Olmsted
Citations
- 20 Wash. 629
- 56 P. 377
- 1899 Wash. LEXIS 215
Syllabus
<p>MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS OFFICERS—POWER OF REMOVAL—RIGHT TO HEARING-REMEDY FOR RECOVERY OF OFFICE.</p> <p>Under § 128 of the city charter of Spokane, which provides that any member of the city board of health “may be removed upon the recommendation of the mayor, by a majority vote of all the members of the city council, or may be removed by the vote of two-thirds of the members of the city council without recommendation of the mayor after charges have been preferred,” where a member of the board is removed by the council upon the recommendation of the mayor, he is not entitled to have charges preferred against him and a hearing granted thereon. (Anders and Fullerton, JX, dissent.)</p> <p>Mandamus is not the proper remedy where one has been illegally removed from office, when the legality of the removal is a disputed question, depending upon the construction of statutory provisions. (Anders and Fullerton, JJ., dissent.)</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- challenge to entitlement to office by physician appointed and then removed by mayor from city board of health may be pursued only by quo warranto
- challenge to entitlement to office by physician appointed and then removed by mayor from city board of health may be pursued only by quo warranto
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Anders, Gordon
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
17 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. VerharenWashington Supreme Court· 1998-12-24· cited 86×
- State Ex Rel. Quick-Ruben v. VerharenWashington Supreme Court· 1998-12-24· cited 78×
- Dittemore v. DickeyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1924-05-21· cited 57×
- Green Mountain School District No. 103 v. DurkeeWashington Supreme Court· 1960-05-02· cited 28×
- Bailen v. Board of Assessors of ChelseaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1922-05-20· cited 24×
- State ex rel. Dudley v. DaggettWashington Supreme Court· 1902-03-20· cited 23×
- Price v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court· 1905-07-28· cited 22×
- State ex rel. Early v. WunderlichSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1920-01-02· cited 21×
- State ex rel. Wolcott v. BoyingtonWashington Supreme Court· 1920-04-05· cited 20×
- State ex rel. Forstell v. OtisWashington Supreme Court· 1924-11-25· cited 12×
- State ex rel. Dent v. McLennanWashington Supreme Court· 1920-02-09· cited 11×
- Ford v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court· 1921-09-13· cited 8×
- GREEN MT. SCH. DIST. v. DurkeeWashington Supreme Court· 1960-05-02· cited 7×
- Clarken v. BlomstromWashington Supreme Court· 1933-10-19· cited 6×
- State ex rel. Gill v. ByrneWashington Supreme Court· 1903-03-05· cited 4×
- Jaramillo v. State Ex Rel. Board of County Com'rsNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1926-10-15· cited 3×
- Standard Gold Mining Co. v. ByersWashington Supreme Court· 1903-02-20· cited 2×
Cites
5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Hallgren v. CampbellMichigan Supreme Court· 1890-08-01· cited 42×
- State ex rel. McReavy v. BurkeWashington Supreme Court· 1894-03-12· cited 29×
- State v. Mayor of Atlantic CitySupreme Court of New Jersey· 1890-02-15· cited 14×
- Lynde v. DibbleWashington Supreme Court· 1898-05-19· cited 12×
- State ex rel. Welch v. Passaic Hospital Ass'nSupreme Court of New Jersey· 1896-06-15· cited 4×
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.