Court Opinion

ID: 4724216
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-08-12 02:50:05.299532+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:07:45.690841
License: Public Domain

Stiles, J.
(dissenting). — Section 26 of article 2 of the constitution provides that the legislature shall direct by law in what manner and in what courts suits may be brought against the state. Upon this subject no legislation has been had, and it is therefore assumed that there is no present way by which a claimant against the state may have his rights adjudicated. In the present case the petitioner claims to have performed services for the state, and seeks as his only remedy a mandamus against the auditor. Under such a state of facts I think that the courts should be somewhat liberal in the granting of alternative writs, and that in this case the alternative writ should be issued, as it is only after the issuance of the alternative writ that the petitioner has any real opportunity to have his cause presented by counsel and argued to the court. For this reason I do not agree to the decision of the court, and express no opinion on the merits of the application.