Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Cboldt; LucyT
One point you should research, and this is offered in the spirit of friendship, is de facto officer doctrine.

Would not apply to a person who is not "eligible" to hold the position.

179 posted on 01/21/2016 9:20:49 AM PST by David
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies ]


To: David
-- Would not apply to a person who is not "eligible" to hold the position. --

I am having a hard time deciding if you are willful, or just stubborn. Either way, you are misleading, and I wouldn't trust you with my socks.

The de facto officer doctrine confers validity upon acts performed by a person acting under the color of official title even though it is later discovered that the legality of that person's appointment or election to office is deficient. Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 440 (1886). "The de facto doctrine springs from the fear of the chaos that would result from multiple and repetitious suits challenging every action taken by every official whose claim to office could be open to question, and seeks to protect the public by insuring the orderly functioning of the government despite technical defects in title to office." 63A Am. Jur. 2d, Public Officers and Employees S: 578, pp. 1080-1081 (1984) (footnote omitted).
Ryder v. United States, 515 U.S. 177 (1995)

If you please, leave me alone, and go dupe your gullible acolytes.

180 posted on 01/21/2016 9:25:33 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson