 Marbury proceeding was instituted by a motion for a rule to show cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue to direct James Madison, as Secretary of State, to deliver to Marbury a commission as a justice of the peace.  The Law Journal - Page 561882Full view - About this book
 | 1834 - 600 lehte
...unless he would take the above oath ; which he refused to do, and applied to Judge Bay, for a rule to show cause why a Writ of Mandamus should not issue, to require the said Colonel Hunt to deliver to the plaintiff his commission. His Honor, upon hearing the... | |
 | Henry William Cripps - 1849 - 310 lehte
...the party so rejected, calling on the churchwardens of the parish and on the governors and guardians to show cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue to order them to call a vestry meeting of the inhabitants of the parish to fill up the vacancies in the... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - 1867 - 624 lehte
...decided November Wi, 186C. Petition for mandamus. This was a petition for an order that respondents show cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue to compel them to register the name of the relator as a legal elector of said township, upon his showing to them, in... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - 1913 - 804 lehte
...against respondent, on the application of relator, from the circuit court for the county of Muskegon, to show cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue to compel him forthwith to sign and issue said bonds. The facts are undisputed, as appears from the answer of... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - 1886 - 744 lehte
...injunction. Application was thereupon made to this Court, and an order granted that the circuit judge show cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue to compel the vacation of this order. The respondent answered, and the matter is now before us upon the petition... | |
 | Illinois. Supreme Court - 1841 - 688 lehte
...relator filed the following affidavit, and moved that a rule be made upon the Auditor of Public Accounts, to show cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue to compel him to issue his warrant on the Treasurer, for $1237,82, the balance claimed to be due the relator,... | |
 | Massachusetts. Supreme Judicial Court - 1866 - 726 lehte
...its original erection and present use ; and prayed that the county commissioners might be summoned to show cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue to direct them to forthwith provide for the erecting and repairing of a suitable court house and jail... | |
 | 1867 - 520 lehte
...pmtt HIGOIXS.— Francis moved for a rule calling on tho London, Chatham, and Dover Railway Company to show cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue to them to take up these awards. RUI, ,,^ EI.WOOD r. EVANS — L. Smith moved for a rnle nwi for a mandamus... | |
 | 1868 - 740 lehte
...satisfactory to the parties who would have been elected by it. Theyprocnred from Judge Cato an order to Walter to show cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue to him to give a certificate of election to the bogus candidates. Walker replied to this document by denying... | |
 | United States. Patent Office - 1918 - 476 lehte
...of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia discharging a rule on the Commissioner of Patents to show cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue to compel him to reopen an interference proceeding between appellant and one Eppler. Appellant prays in his petition... | |
| |
