Skip to main content
· 4/11/1911

State ex rel. Cowles v. Schively

Citations

  • 63 Wash. 103
  • 114 P. 901
  • 1911 Wash. LEXIS 1164

Syllabus

<p>Statutes — Construction—Executive Construction. The construction of a statute of doubtful meaning, by the highest law officer of the executive department, while not binding on the courts, is entitled to considerable weight.</p> <p>Newspapers — “Oe Largest Circulation” — Designation for Publication — Discretion of Officer — Abuse—Insurance. Rem. & Bal. Code, § 9037, which provides that the insurance commissioner shall designate two daily papers “of the largest general circulation” for the publication of the annual insurance reports, and that he shall have the right to make a personal examination to determine “which are the two papers of such largest circulation,” merely requires him to designate two papers from the class of papers having the largest circulation, and vests a discretion in him to designate any two papers belonging to that class, although the difference in their circulation may be considerable, which discretion will not be controlled by the courts except for abuse (Gose, Fullerton, and Chadwick, JJ., dissenting).</p> <p>Same — Designation of Newspaper — Abuse of Discretion. Under Rem. & Bal. Code, § 9037, vesting in the insurance commissioner a discretion to designate a newspaper in Eastern Washington from the class of papers having the largest general circulation for the publication of the annual insurance reports, the commissioner’s act in designating a paper having a circulation of from 6,000 to 9,000 when another paper had five times that circulation, is not so arbitrary and capricious as to call for interference by the courts (Gose and Fullerton, JJ., dissenting).</p> <p>Mandamus — Pleading—Conclusion of Pleader. In mandamus to compel the designation of a certain newspaper for the publication of annual insurance reports, the allegation that the insurance commissioner wrongfully and unlawfully designated a certain paper for the publication amounts to no more than the conclusion of the pleader from the facts alleged.</p> <p>Mandamus — To Public Of

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that a party’s reliance on counsel’s advice to not pay bill could not be willful contempt

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Chadwick, Gose, Parker

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.