From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Beal v. Cohn

Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit
Oct 3, 1928
30 F.2d 1008 (1st Cir. 1928)

Summary

In Cohn v. Beal, 61 Miss. 398, the court held that there could not be a de facto and also a de jure officer holding and exercising the functions of an office at the same time, and that there could not be two de facto incumbents of an office at the same time, and where two are acting simultaneously, each under claim of right, the acts of the one who has the legal right to the office will be recognized.

Summary of this case from Day v. McCandless

Opinion

No. 2293.

October 3, 1928.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Massachusetts; James M. Morton, Jr., Judge.

Before BINGHAM, JOHNSON, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.


Upon stipulation, it is ordered that this case be, and the same hereby is, docketed and dismissed, without costs, and that mandate issue forthwith.


Summaries of

Beal v. Cohn

Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit
Oct 3, 1928
30 F.2d 1008 (1st Cir. 1928)

In Cohn v. Beal, 61 Miss. 398, the court held that there could not be a de facto and also a de jure officer holding and exercising the functions of an office at the same time, and that there could not be two de facto incumbents of an office at the same time, and where two are acting simultaneously, each under claim of right, the acts of the one who has the legal right to the office will be recognized.

Summary of this case from Day v. McCandless
Case details for

Beal v. Cohn

Case Details

Full title:Henry W. BEAL, Appellant, v. Ralph COHN, Trustee, Appellee

Court:Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit

Date published: Oct 3, 1928

Citations

30 F.2d 1008 (1st Cir. 1928)

Citing Cases

Board of Com'rs v. Montgomery

Waddy West was the de jure member of the board of Mississippi levee commissioners at the regular meeting in…

Walcott v. Wells

It is evident that there is no room for such an officer if the number of officers fixed by the law are in the…