Editing Quo warranto (section)

=== United States ===
{{lang|la|Quo warranto}} could be brought against a corporation when it misuses its franchise. In 1890, the [[Supreme Court of Ohio]] wrote:

{{blockquote|The corporation has received vitality from the state. It continues during its existence to be the creature of the state, must live subservient to its laws, and has such powers and franchises as those laws have bestowed upon it, and none others. As the state was not bound to create it in the first place, it is not bound to maintain it after having done so, if it violates the laws or public policy of the state, or misuses its franchises to oppress the citizens thereof.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Lewis |first1=Lawrence |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vtkpAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22The+corporation+has+received+vitality+from+the+state%22;+it+continues+during+its+existence+to+be+the+creature+of+the+state;&pg=PA334 |title=The American and English Railroad Cases: A Collection of All the Railroad Cases in the Courts of Last Resort in America and England |last2=Hamilton |first2=Adelbert |last3=Merrill |first3=John Houston |last4=McKinney |first4=William Mark |last5=Kerr |first5=James Manford |last6=Thomson |first6=John Crawford |date=1890 |publisher=Edward Thompson Company |pages=332–334 |language=en}}</ref>}}

In 1876, the Pennsylvania senate passed a resolution instructing the Attorney General to begin {{lang|la|quo warranto}} proceedings to [[Judicial dissolution|revoke the charter]] of the [[Baltimore, Philadelphia and New York Railroad]].<ref>{{Cite book |last1=House |first1=Pennsylvania General Assembly |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=a3JMAAAAMAAJ&dq=Baltimore,+Philadelphia+and+New+York+Railroad+quo+warranto&pg=PA538 |title=Journal of the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania |last2=Representatives |first2=Pennsylvania General Assembly House of |date=1876 |publisher=George Helmbold |pages=917 |language=en}}</ref>

In the modern [[United States]], {{lang|la|quo warranto}} usually arises in a [[Civil law (common law)|civil]] case as a [[plaintiff]]'s claim (and thus a "[[cause of action]]" instead of a writ) that some governmental or corporate official was not validly elected to that office or is wrongfully exercising powers beyond (or ''[[ultra vires]]'') those authorized by statute or by the corporation's charter.

In [[New York (state)|New York State]], the former writ of {{lang|la|quo warranto}} has been [[codification (law)|codified]]. Per Executive Law § 63-b, only the Attorney General, at his or her discretion, "may maintain an action, upon his own information or upon the complaint of a private person, against a person who usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises within the state a franchise or a public office, civil or military, or an office in a domestic corporation."<ref>{{cite web |date=1 Jan 2021 |title=New York Consolidated Laws, Executive Law - EXC § 63-b. Action by attorney-general against usurper of office or franchise |url=https://codes.findlaw.com/ny/executive-law/exc-sect-63-b.html |website=FindLaw}}</ref>