TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Williamson v. Herseth

Williamson v. Herseth, 104 N.W.2d 473 (S.D. 1960)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
South Dakota Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
August 18, 1960
Docket
No. File No. 972
Judges
Bandy, Dandy, Smith
Citations
104 N.W.2d 47378 S.D. 4761960 S.D. LEXIS 37

Opinion of the Court — Dandy

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

DANDY, Circuit Judge.

Charges made against Alan Williamson as Unemployment Compensation Commissioner *477 were heard before the Governor pursuant to SDC 1960 Supp. 17.0803-3. Following such -hearing, but before any official action had been taken by the Governor, Williamson obtained an Alternative Writ of Prohibition from the Circuit Court of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, in Hughes County. By such writ the Governor was restrained from proceeding further with the removal of Williamson from office. On the return day the Trial Court, on the authority of In re Petition of Mee, 45 S.D. 303 , 187 N.W. 540 , declared itself to be without power to stay proceedings pending appeal and entered an order quashing and dismissing such writ. This appeal is from such order. No application was made to this Court for the preservation of the status quo. Thereafter the Governor formally removed Williamson from office and appointed bis successor, who has duly qualified. Additionally, the term of -office for which Williamson was appointed expired during the pendency of this appeal.

What was written by the Supreme Court of the United States in Jones v. Montague, 194 U.S. 147 , 24 S.Ct. 611, 612 , 48 L.Ed. 913 , is explanatory of the action which must be taken here:

“The case before us is one in prohibition. * * * the thing sought to be prohibited -has been done, and cannot be undone by any order of court. * * *any adjudication which this court might make would be only an ineffectual decision of the question whether or not these petitioners were wronged by what has been ful-ly accomplished. Under those circumstances there is nothing but a moot case remaining, and the motion to dismiss must be sustained.”

The motion herein to dismiss the appeal is granted.

All the Judges concur. BANDY, Circuit Judge, sitting for SMITH, J., disqualified.

How later courts describe this case

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

1993: 119932026peak 1993 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Cummings v. Mickelson495 N.W.2d 493 (S.D. 1993)

Most recent

  1. Cummings v. Mickelson495 N.W.2d 493 (S.D. 1993)

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 2

DepthCaseCited by
Jones v. Montague, 194 U.S. 147 (1904) 79
Mee v. Hirning, 187 N.W. 540 (S.D. 1922) 5

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