TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Schulte v. Bolen

Schulte v. Bolen, 1923 OK 483, 216 P. 928
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma · State Highest Courts
Decided
July 10, 1923
Docket
No. 14467
Judges
McNeill, Kane
Citations
216 P. 9281923 OK 48390 Okla. 2381923 Okla. LEXIS 1162

Opinion of the Court — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

This is an original action instituted in this court for a writ of mandamus by which W. F. Schulte, petitioner, seeks to compel Honorable J. W. Bolen, 'district judge in and for Pontotoc county, Okla., to disqualify from presiding and further proceeding in the proceedings commenced by the board of county commissioners of said county to determine the legal outstanding judgment indebtedness against Pontotoc county and for the issuance of funding bond's to pay said indebtedness. ' The petitioner, W. F. Schulte, is a resident taxpayer of Pontotoc county, Okla., and, together with others, has filed a protest and objections to the issuance of said funding bonds.

The cause was submitted to the court on the 6th day of July, 1923, upon the petition, objections to petition, and the response of the respondent to the alternative writ issued herein, and upon a careful consideration of the same it is our conclusion that the petitioner is entitled to the writ of mandamus.

*239 In order to maintain and foster proper respect and confidence of the people in the courts, the courts must be presided over by unbiased, impartial, and disinterested judges, and all doubt and suspicion to the contrary must be jealously guarded against. McCullough v. Davis, 11 Okla. Cr. 431 , 147 Pac. 779 ; State ex rel. Warner v. Fullerton, 76 Okla. 35 , 183 Pac. 979 ; Dennison v. Christopher, Superior Judge, 18 Okla. Cr. —, 200 Pac. 783 .

For the reasons stated, it is ordered the respondent forthwith certify his disqualification as presiding judge in the cause, and upon his failure to do so the writ of mandamus will issue.

All the Justices concur, except McNEILL and KANE, JJ., not participating. ..

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1927: 21930: 11931: 11937: 119272026peak 1927 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Ex Parte Owens1927 OK CR 171, 258 P. 758
  2. State ex rel. Attorney General v. Martin1927 OK 147, 256 P. 681
  3. Fisk v. Venable1937 OK CR 87, 68 P.2d 425
  4. Twin City Fire Ins. Co. v. First Nat. Bank1930 OK 483, 292 P. 833
  5. Sheldon v. Board of Education4 P.2d 430 (Kan. 1931)

Most recent

  1. Fisk v. Venable1937 OK CR 87, 68 P.2d 425
  2. Sheldon v. Board of Education4 P.2d 430 (Kan. 1931)
  3. Twin City Fire Ins. Co. v. First Nat. Bank1930 OK 483, 292 P. 833
  4. Ex Parte Owens1927 OK CR 171, 258 P. 758
  5. State ex rel. Attorney General v. Martin1927 OK 147, 256 P. 681

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
State ex rel. v. Fullerton, 1919 OK 265, 183 P. 979 16
McCullough v. Davis, 1915 OK CR 34, 147 P. 779 7
Dennison v. Christopher, 1921 OK CR 181, 200 P. 783 12

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list