State ex rel. Miller v. Burnham

127 N.W. 504, 20 N.D. 405, 1910 N.D. LEXIS 93
CourtNorth Dakota Supreme Court
DecidedJune 24, 1910
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 127 N.W. 504 (State ex rel. Miller v. Burnham) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering North Dakota Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State ex rel. Miller v. Burnham, 127 N.W. 504, 20 N.D. 405, 1910 N.D. LEXIS 93 (N.D. 1910).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This appeal is heard at this time by stipulation of parties and consent of this court. The question involved is whether a petition to place the name of the relator as a candidate for nomination for states attorney upon the ballot to be used at the primary election to be held June 29, 1910, should have been filed and such name printed upon the ballot by the county auditor of Foster county. The petitioner mailed his petition addressed to the county auditor at Carrington by registered letter at McHenry, Foster county, North Dakota, on the 27th day of May, 1910, with the request that it be filed. It should have reached the auditor’s office on the 28th day of May in due course of mail, but his return and the findings of the trial court show that it was received by him on Sunday, the 29th day of May. Monday, the [406]*40630th, was the last day on which such petitions could be presented to the county auditor, but that day was a legal holiday, being Memorial day, and the county auditor refused to treat the petition as though presented and filed prior to the 29th day of May, 1910, which was the 29th day prior to the primary. The statute provides that “every candidate for a county or district office shall not more than forty days nor less than thirty days, and before 4 o’clock p. m. of the thirtieth day prior to any primary election, present to the county auditor a petition giving his name, postoffice address,” etc.

The district court held that the act of the county auditor in refusing to receive and’ file the petition was legal. No new questions are involved in this appeal. The law of the case is covered by the opinion of this court in State ex rel. Anderson v. Falley, 9 N. D. 464, 83 N. W. 913.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

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

Related

Koella v. State Ex Rel. Moffett
405 S.W.2d 184 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1966)
State Ex Rel. Englert v. Meier
115 N.W.2d 574 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1962)
State Ex Rel. Burchard v. Byxne
209 N.W. 345 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1926)
State ex rel. Peterson v. Hall
176 N.W. 117 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1919)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
127 N.W. 504, 20 N.D. 405, 1910 N.D. LEXIS 93, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-miller-v-burnham-nd-1910.