Skip to main content
· 11/6/1920

State ex rel. Hopkins v. Foley

Citations

  • 107 Kan. 608
  • 193 P. 361
  • 1920 Kan. LEXIS 132

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Quo Warranto — Ouster of Public Official — Findings and Conclusions of Special Commissioner Advisory Only. In an action originating in this court, when a special commissioner is appointed to take the testimony and to make findings of fact and conclusions of law, the commissioner’s findings, if exceptions are taken thereto, are only advisory, and the court itself must examine all the testimony, and determine for itself the truth of the matters given in evidence, and the weight and significance to be attached thereto, as well as to determine the correct judgment to be entered.</p> <p>2. Same — Ouster of Public Officials — Good Faith of Officer Charged the Determining Factor. In quo warranto, where forfeiture of a public office is demanded by the state on charges of willful misconduct in office or willful neglect of official duty, the paramount consideration in scrutinizing the acts of the defendant officer is whether they bear the distinguishing characteristics of genuine good faith, not whether those acts are technically free from error when viewed under rigid and critical scrutiny.</p> <p>3. Same — Evidence Fails to Establish Willful Misconduct or Willful Neglect of Duty. The record examined, and held that it does not establish the state’s charges of willful misconduct in office or willful neglect of duty on the part of the defendants.</p>

Judges: Dawson

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.