Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1898-01-27
Phillips VS.. WeIch, II New. l5S.


The Supreme Court of California under
similar statutes has so held. and that
court i'll a recent case in constituting the
two sections of statutes above quoted,
held, that the clause in section 1914
whether the inferior tribunal had regu-
larly pursued the authority of such tri-
bunal' is to be construed as the equiva-
lent of the clause has exceeded the juris-
diction of such tribunal in section l0ES.'
Quinchard VS.. The Board OF Trustees
- Pac. (Cal.) S56.
That court in the same case say: 1.-THE
ch&r:l tor Of The act or determination
souglE g.. Np reviewed. rather than the
tribuna. or officers by which the act or
determination is made. is the test for de-
ternli.. -D',htr The Wit AOuld be is
sued"
If then, we pass upon the constitutions
atty of the act incorporating the city of
Reno, we are not determining whether
the City Council of that city exceeded its
! jurisdiction in ordering bonds TO be sold
for the purposes indicated, and advertise
ing for bids to purchase such bonds, but
we are passing Upont the right Of respond
euts to exercise the functions of city
Council and upon the validity of the cor
p0rate existence of the city of Rem This
we do not believe we nave the power or
authority 10 do under the limitations OF
the ~regulative statute above cited. Fur
II ", t!o G2te~'ims involving the cOnSti-
tt; 1!ii.v 81 the act Incorporating the
yltv of Ean0, and involving the corporate
cX:;.N of that city. and the right OF the
re- ,,..., Ms to exercise in any manner
the functions of City Council under the
act Incorporating the city, must and car
he determined by another proceeding
plain, speedy and adequate. Under tn,
provisions Of an act regulating proceed
ings in quo OGrrant0. approved February
: DIST, 1865, a private Individual may file al
information against any person unlaw
fully holding or exercising any public of
! fee or franchise within this State 8 : =
. OF when any persons act as a corporation
{ within his State without being author
ized bv law : ( = = = or when they ex
$ crcise powers o conferred 10y law
t Gen. Stats. 1885, Sees. 37lI, 1921
9 Ky the provisions Of the same act tn
form Of Judgment in such proceedings i
indicated. and precedence over all othe
8 proceedings. except criminal actions, i
e order and time of trial, is given.
Il Gen. Stats. 1885, Secs. 37212-372S-3736.
It seems clear to us that the languag
ser when any persons act as Il corporate
within this State without being author
: lied 10y law is sufficiently broad to il
st clude persons acting as a city board OF
q municipal corporation without authOrit
,r of law. Ii the act incorporating the cit
of Reno is unconstitutional, as elaine
Ivy the ~relator, then the respondents Al
Of acting as a corporation without authorit
% Of law, and under the express provisio,
#. of the statute quo W11TnntO is the prOpt
Is remedy under which to determine tn
question.
This position is amply supported
of authorities. Under a private law of Il
n State of Illinois, approved February 20t
1861, creating the Board of Education
of the city Of Quincy, the exclusive contr
and management of the public schools
he that city were given to that Board. TT
statute revising the law in reiatinu to q
lie wor1anto provided, that in case any Pc
as son shall usurp, intrude into or unlaV
lis fully hold, OF execute any office or fra
chise & & + & Il or any association or nuI
or Der of persons shall act within Il is Sta
rift as a corporation without being legally i
n corporated, or any corporation does
units any act which amounts to a su
he render or forfeiture of its rights and pri
or ileges as a corporation, or exercises POI
he ers not conferred by law i = tho A
DIV torney General, or States attorney of 1
proper county, either Of his own acco
or at the instance of an individual relat'
may present a petition = > # II for lea
Dc to file an information in the nature OF
nc quo UdrrdiltO + II y y y :" n
or Revised Stats. Ill. 1874. D. 7S7.
Dr. Action was commenced in quo rarrd
to against the Boand of Education of t
city of Quincy charging that it had eX,
nv cised certain powers not conferred
in law. and the Supreme Court of that st;
of in passing upon that question say; IT
ar Board of Education is a corporation C
,ic- ated by law, clothed with the exercise
no certain powers in relation to the pub
of schools of Quincy. Now, if the Board
ate the discharge of it's duties as a corpo
ton, exercises poWers not conferred
Lnw, ii is apparent that it will fall will
.rit the obvious meaning Of the statute,
y.S less the plain reading Of the statute il
ne be disregarded. The very gist of
e,t- complaint here is, that the Board of f.
ur- cation, a corporation, is exercising pr
ers not conferred by law. unless it