Skip to main content

State v. Ross

Citations

  • 183 P. 918
  • 76 Okla. 11
  • 1919 OK 257
  • 1919 Okla. LEXIS 106

Syllabus

<p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p> <p>1. Mandamus — Jurisdiction of Supreme Court — When Exercised.</p> <p>The power of the Supreme Court to grant mandamus and to hear and determine the same as authorized by sec. 2, art. 7, Constitution,- will be exercised only when the questions involved are publici juris, or when some unusual situation exists, whereby not to entertain jurisdiction would work a great wrong or result in a practical denial of justice.</p> <p>2. Same — School Officers — Jurisdiction of Supreme Court.</p> <p>Where an action in mandamus has been brought' by the state on the relation of the Attorney General against a county superintendent of public instruction in the district court having jurisdiction to compel the performance of a ministerial duty arising under sec. 2, art. 7, chap. 219, Session Laws 1913, and such court erroneously holds that the parties have a remedy at law by appeal aiid refuses to entertain jurisdiction, and the effect thereof, if an appeal there from were prosecuted to this court, would, in the ordinary • course of the law, be to work great delay in the opening of the public schools of the affected districts, the Supreme Court will entertain and exercise its original jurisdiction by mamdamus so as to prevent a denial of justice.</p> <p>3. Schools and School Districts — Consolidation — Duty of Superintendent.</p> <p>The duties imposed upon a county superintendent by sec. 2, art. 7, chap. 219, Session Laws 1913, in respect to declaring school districts disorganized and a consolidated district composed thereof organized, involve the exercise of no discretion on the part of such superintendent, but are purely ministerial in their character, and their performance may be enforced by mandamus brought in. the Supreme Court, in proper cases.</p> <p>4. Same — Appeal to State Superintendent.</p> <p>Sec. 2, art. 4, chap. 219, Session Laws 1913, providing that “in the alteration of or refusal to alter, the boundaries of any joint .school district,

Judges: Sharp, Rainey, Harrison, Ford, Johnson, McNeill

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

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.