General
WILLIAM H. BARNES, Petitioner, v. THOMAS HUGHES, Territorial Auditor, Respondent
4 Ariz. 137·Arizona Supreme Court·1893·AZ
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
[Civil No. 307.]
WILLIAM H. BARNES, Petitioner, v. THOMAS HUGHES, Territorial Auditor, Respondent.
ORIGINAL APPLICATION for Writ of Mandamus.
William H. Barnes, in pro. per.
William Herring, Attorney-General, for Respondent.
Filed January, 1893.
[MAJORITY — SLOAN, J.]
SLOAN, J.
This case is in all respects similar to the case of Porter v. Hughes, ante, p. 1, (just decided). The same statement of facts was argued to on this case as in Porter v. Hughes, and hence the decision of the latter case will control in the disposition of this case.
The plaintiff will therefore be granted the writ prayed for in his complaint.
Kibbey, J., and Wells, J., concur.