This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2014-11-19 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| The treatment of a de facto officer's acts is premised on the reality that third persons cannot always investigate the right of one assuming to hold an important office and, as such, have a right to assume that officials apparently qualified and in office are legally such.[38] Public interest demands that acts of persons holding, under color of title, an office created by a valid statute be, likewise, deemed valid insofar as the public as distinguished from the officer in question is concerned.[39] Indeed, it is far more cogently acknowledged that the de facto doctrine has been formulated, not for the protection of the de facto officer principally, but rather for the protection of the public and individuals who get involved in the official acts of persons discharging the duties of an office without being lawful officers.[40] | |||||