State ex rel. Hampton v. Oakes

1955 OK 61, 281 P.2d 749, 1955 Okla. LEXIS 426
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedMarch 8, 1955
DocketNo. 36778
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 1955 OK 61 (State ex rel. Hampton v. Oakes) 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
State ex rel. Hampton v. Oakes, 1955 OK 61, 281 P.2d 749, 1955 Okla. LEXIS 426 (Okla. 1955).

Opinion

HALLEY, Justice.

This is an original action filed in this Court by the State of Oklahoma ex rel. Don Hampton, County Attorney of Delaware County, Oklahoma, against -Mrs. Olen May Oakes, in the nature of quo warranto to remove Mrs. Olen May Oakes as County Commissioner for District No. 3 of Delaware County for the term of office 1955-1957, beginning January 3, 1955. Ed. C. Ferguson petitioned to be made a party defendant and such petition is granted. -

. The facts out of which the controversy arose are not disputed. Robert L. Oakes was the duly elected and acting County Commissioner. for District No. 3 of Delaware County for the term of office 1953— 1955. November 2, 1954, Mr. Oakes was reelected for the term of office 1955-1957, beginning January 3, 1955. He died on November 5, 1954, only three days after being elected for the two year , term beginning January 3, 1955.

On November 10, 1954, acting governor, James E. Berry, appointed Mrs. Olen May Oakes to said office, “to fill the unexpired term of Robert L. Oakes, deceased.” She qualified and entered upon the duties of the office.

After the beginning of the 1955 — 1957 term of office and on January 5, 1955, Governor Johnston Murray appointed Ed C. Ferguson to said office, “for a term effective upon your qualification and ending the first Monday in January, 1957.”

Mr. Ferguson thereafter took and filed his oath of office and his duly approved bond, all in accordance with the applicable statutes.

It is alleged that Mrs. Oakes refused and continues to refuse to surrender the office here involved to Mr. Ferguson.

■ This Court has assumed original jurisdiction under Section 2, Article VII of the State Constitution and sections 1531 and 1532, 12 O.S.1951.

[751]*751• Plaintiff contends further that under section' 3.1, 51 O.S.1951, where a person elected to public office dies prior to the beginning of the term of office for which he was elected, there is deemed to be a vacancy for the term which may be filled by the appointing authority at any time after the beginning of such term, and that it is the duty of the prior incumbent holding over to surrender the office to the person so appointed.

Section 3.1, 51 O.S.1951, is as follows:

“When any person elected to a public office has died or failed to qualify and enter upon the duties of such office for any reason or cause at the time and in the manner provided by law, and for six months or more thereafter has not qualified and entered upon the duties of said office, such public office shall be deemed vacant and shall be filled by the officer or board authorized to fill such vacancy, provided, however, that any appointment made under the provisions of this section to fill an office of any person who has failed to qualify on account of military service shall be only for the period of enforced absence of said person, or until said person qualifies for said office. The person holding over in such office shall surrender the same to the person so appointed upon his qualifying -for said office as provided by law. The provisions of this Act shall be retroactive as well as prospective in its operation. Laws 1945, p. 154, § 1.”

We think the applicable portions of the foregoing statute are:

“When any person elected to a public office has died * * * such public office shall be deemed vacant and shall be filled 'by the officer or board authorized to fill such vacancy * * *. The person holding over in such office shall surrender the same to the person so appointed upon his qualifying for said office as provided by law. * * * ”

The defendant points out that Robert L. Oakes was elected in November, 1954, to succeed himself, defeating Ed C. Ferguson, who now claims the office by virtue of his appointment by ■ the Governor of Oklahoma. It is true that Ed C. Ferguson is not a person elected to succeed Robert L. Oakes, and could not qualify “as a successor elected.” Defendant also claims that at the time of Mr. Ferguson’s appointment, there was no vacancy in the office of County Commissioner for the 3rd District of Delaware County. Defendant claims that she was appointed under the provision of Section 15, 51 O.S.1951, which provides that she shall hold said office until her successor is “elected and qualified”, and that no successor has been elected to succeed her and that she is entitled to hold such office until her successor is duly elected as is provided in Subsection (C), Section 131, 19 O.S.1951, that one shall hold office until a successor shall be elected and qualified, which she claims entitles her to continue to hold the office until a successor “is elected and qualified” in what she claims to be the later expression of the legislative will, on this question.

Defendant further says that the death of Mr. Oakes created but one vacancy in the office of County Commissioner and that this one vacancy was filled by the appointment of the defendant, even though that appointment expressly provided that it was to “ * * * fill the unexpired term of Robert L. Oakes, deceased”, being the 1953— 1955 term ending January 3, 1955.

The plaintiff contends that the death of the incumbent for the 1953-1955 term created a vacancy for the remainder of that term, and that the death of the person elected for the 1955-1957 term created another distinct vacancy for the term beginning January 3, 1955. The defendant contends that there was only one vacancy beginning when Mrs. Oakes was appointed to fill the unexpired portion of the 1953-1955 term, and extending until the end of the term to which Mr. Oakes had been elected in November, 1954. Plaintiff claims that a second vacancy occurred by the death of Mr. Oakes.

Defendant cites the case of Wooten v. State ex rel. Butler, 204 Okl. 423, 230 P.2d 889. There the appointing authority for a county'office held that a vacancy existed where the person elected to such office [752]*752failed to qualify prior to the expiration of the time provided within which such person should qualify, which was 10 days from the commencement of a two year term beginning July 4, 1949, and expiring July IS, 1949. The ..appointing authority met on July 5, 1949, and found that the person elected had not qualified, declared a vacancy and appointed another person to fill the alleged vacancy.

The trial court found that no vacancy existed when the appointment was made and no authority existed in the appointing authority to make an appointment to fill a vacancy that did not exist. This Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment and held that no vacancy could exist until the expiration of the time granted by law for qualification of the party elected. The only other point decided in the Wooten case was as to the right of a county attorney to prosecute in the name of the State an action to oust a party who has unlawfully usurped a county office. This decision is not applicable to the facts before us.

Both plaintiff and defendant cite the case of Allison v. Massey, 108 Okl. 140, 235 P. 192. However, section 3.1, 51 O.S.1951, was enacted after the Allison decision, which was in 1925. Section 3.1 was enacted April 28, 1945, S.L.1945, pages 153-154. In the Allison v.

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

Related

Kingsbury v. Westlake Management Co.
674 F. App'x 792 (Tenth Circuit, 2016)
People v. Rosalinda C.
224 Cal. App. 4th 1 (California Court of Appeal, 2014)
Mercury Marine v. Lumpkin
1994 OK CIV APP 164 (Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma, 1994)
State Ex Rel. MacY v. Freeman
1991 OK 59 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1991)
Opinion No.
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1980
Opinion No. 78-261 (1978) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1978
Opinion No. 78-259 (1978) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1978
Opinion No. 78-229 (1978) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1978
Opinion No. 78-207 (1978) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1978
Opinion No. 73-103 (1973) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1973
Opinion No. 72-110 (1972) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1972
Opinion No. 70-261 (1970) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1970
Opinion No. 69-334 (1969) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1969
Opinion No. 68-368 (1968) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1968
Opinion No. 68-330 (1968) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1968
Opinion No. 68-320 (1968) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1968
Opinion No. 68-301 (1968) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1968
Opinion No. 68-252 (1968) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1968
Opinion No. 68-114 (1968) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1968

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1955 OK 61, 281 P.2d 749, 1955 Okla. LEXIS 426, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-hampton-v-oakes-okla-1955.