History
  • No items yet
midpage
State ex rel. Hinchey v. Allyn
7 Wash. 285
Wash.
1893
Check Treatment

Lead Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Stiles, J.

A judge of the superior court whose term of office expired on the second Monday of January, 1893, cannot be required- by mandamus to settle and certify a statement of facts on appeal after the expiration of his term. *286The act of January 21,1893 (Laws, p. 6), does not purport to do more than to authorize the ex-judges to settle- and certify, it does not, and could not, require them to do anything.

The application for a writ in this case is, therefore, denied.

Dunbar, C. J., and Hoyt, J., concur.

Scott, J., concurs in the result.






Concurrence Opinion

Anders, J.

(concurring). For the reasons stated by me in Faulconer v. Warner, 2 Wash. 525 (27 Pac. Rep. 274), I am of the opinion that, prior to the passage of the act of January 21, 1893, it was the duty of a judge whose office had expired to settle statements of facts in cases tried before him. But as I feel bound by the majority opinion in that case, I concur in the disposition of this application on the ground set forth in the foregoing opinion of Judge Stiles.

Case Details

Case Name: State ex rel. Hinchey v. Allyn
Court Name: Washington Supreme Court
Date Published: Nov 17, 1893
Citation: 7 Wash. 285
Docket Number: No. 1125
Court Abbreviation: Wash.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.