Harrell v. County Election Board

1950 OK 213, 221 P.2d 778, 203 Okla. 360, 1950 Okla. LEXIS 608
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedAugust 4, 1950
DocketNo. 34787
StatusPublished

This text of 1950 OK 213 (Harrell v. County Election Board) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Harrell v. County Election Board, 1950 OK 213, 221 P.2d 778, 203 Okla. 360, 1950 Okla. LEXIS 608 (Okla. 1950).

Opinion

ARNOLD, V.C.J.

T. H. Harrell was a candidate for the office of county commissioner of district No. 3 of Sequoyah county at the run-off primary held on July 25, 1950, and according to the tabulated and announced results of the votes cast in said race he received fewer votes than his opponent. [361]*361Within the time prescribed by law he filed his application for recount of the ballots cast for said office in the runoff primary challenging the correctness of the results announced by alleging: “that I am not satisfied with the count of each and all of the ballots cast in said election and that applicant desires to have each and every ballot in each and all of the ballot boxes in said commissioners district No. 3 recounted.” He deposited $250 in cash with the board for the purpose of defraying the expense of the recount.

The members of the board convened with the district judge in the district courtroom and after consideration of the application, on motion to dismiss, the application was dismissed and the recount refused. Thereupon this petition for writ of mandamus requiring the defendants to grant a recount of the ballots cast at said election was filed, in this court.

Said petition under the rules of law this day announced in William O. Coe v. State Election Board et al., 203 Okla. 356, 221 P. 2d 774, and for the reasons therein stated, was and is sufficient to entitle said petitioner to a recount as prayed for.

Writ granted.

DAVISON, C.J., and WELCH, CORN, LUTTRELL, HALLEY, JOHNSON, and O’NEAL, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Coe v. State Election Board
1950 OK 212 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1950)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1950 OK 213, 221 P.2d 778, 203 Okla. 360, 1950 Okla. LEXIS 608, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harrell-v-county-election-board-okla-1950.