Talk:Quo warranto

Latin Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Latin on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LatinWikipedia:WikiProject LatinTemplate:WikiProject LatinLatin articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Old discussions

This would be the legal equivalent then to the childish retort, "Who died and made you boss/king?", would it not?

Is this really Latin or pseudo-Latin? The "w" is is a Middle ages innovation, isn't it? Jorge Stolfi 14:38, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)

"Quo Warranto" is real Latin, not pseudo-Latin (i.e., it is not a made up or fake phrase or language). Medieval Latin is the accepted scholarly identification for the language (if one wants to be picky and distinguish it from Classical Latin), so I have changed the entry to reflect this.Ibnsanjil 14:01, 20 October 2006 (UTC)ibnsanjil[reply]

Could you provide a reference for this? Further, is this globally accepted medieval Latin, or just an English version? (For natural reasons, the medieval Latin used in different countries was not identical, with greater variations than in various country-specific versions of modern English.)88.77.140.207 (talk) 15:02, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The user you are replying to hasn't edited Wikipedia in 3 years. Some other editor may be able to answer though. Road Wizard (talk) 21:24, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like English Latin to me, derived from the English word. Peter jackson (talk) 18:39, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Later, I added material on the origins of Quo Warranto under King Edward I (and reworked the original statement into my edit), and added two basic references on the subject. If I have time, I will come back and finish off the medieval English usage post- Edward I, but others should feel free to add that in. And, possibly divide the material into sections - medieval and modern uses? Ibnsanjil 132.170.50.207 17:50, 20 October 2006 (UTC)ibnsanjil[reply]

Unsourced and dubious

With U.S. independence sovereignty passed from the monarch to the people, and with it the right and authority of every individual to seek the prerogative writs, such as quo warranto and habeas corpus, "in the name of the people", for oneself or any other. It is called "prerogative" because a court of competent jurisdiction has no discretion whether to issue them, only to set the response for a hearing, usually within 3-20 days, to hear, ahead of all other cases on its docket, the proof of the respondent that he has authority, and to support the respondent if he provides sufficient proof. By the ancient standard of due process, if the court failed to conduct the hearing, the writ would issue by default without further notice, and could be enforced by any persons as militia.

In the New York Ratification Convention, amendments were proposed to the new Constitution that included one that would recognize the right of every person to bring the prerogative writs "in the name of the people". This right, which may be characterised as the right to a presumption of nonauthority, was apparently considered so obvious by James Madison and others that he combined it with others to become the Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Roadrunner 19:26, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Obama related edits..

I've already reverted the addition of this information twice, but I'll set out my reasoning in more detail here. This is an article on the quo warranto writ/legal proceeding. It does not need a listing of every time one has been filed, even for someone prominent like Obama. Even if it did, as the information is presented, it's not really discussing the legal proceeding, it's discussing Obama and Chrysler, and thus would be much better served in articles somewhere else. Here, it's WP:COATRACK and WP:UNDUE. Here, we should be discussing the evolution of the legal proceeding. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:35, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Quo warranto. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090405045049/http://www.mobar.org:80/4df86bfb-bd0f-496f-975b-6d30db2e274e.aspx to http://www.mobar.org/4df86bfb-bd0f-496f-975b-6d30db2e274e.aspx#Quo_Warranto

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:08, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Statute??

There’s a mention in the article on Quia Emptores (statute passed in 1290) of a "companion statute of Quo Warranto (1290)" - and the link is to this article. But this article deals with the writ only. Can anyone add something about the statute? – SquisherDa (talk) 01:20, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]