Mays v. Cobb

96 S.W. 1079, 100 Tex. 131, 1906 Tex. LEXIS 187
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 25, 1906
DocketNo. 1609.
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 96 S.W. 1079 (Mays v. Cobb) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mays v. Cobb, 96 S.W. 1079, 100 Tex. 131, 1906 Tex. LEXIS 187 (Tex. 1906).

Opinion

GAINES, Chief Justice.

We are of opinion that the writ of mandamus prayed for in this case should be refused.

As we construe section 130 of the Act of the Legislature commonly known as "the Terrell election law,” it was the purpose of the Legislature to devolve the duty of determining .the nominee of a party for a district office upon the convention called for that purpose and also to make it the duty of the chairman of that convention to certify the result. It appears from the allegations of the petition and the answer, that the chairman of the convention called to make a nomination of a candidate for the office of a Bepresentative in Congress for the Sixth Congressional District, has given his certificates as required by the section named, showing that Bufus Hardy was nominated. This we think is conclusive and that the Democratic executive committee for the district is without power to review that action. Whether the chairman of the convention acted properly or not, it is not for us to decide. Since we conclude that the relator has shown no right to be declared the nominee of the convention, a writ of mandamus should not be awarded in his favor.

Mandamus refused.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
96 S.W. 1079, 100 Tex. 131, 1906 Tex. LEXIS 187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mays-v-cobb-tex-1906.