Wells v. Eustace

Supreme Court of Alabama

Wells v. Eustace

612 So. 2d 453, 1993 Ala. LEXIS 17, 1993 WL 5556

Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided January 15, 1993·No. 1911809·Published

Opinion

SHORES, Justice.

This appeal involves an election contest. The circuit court correctly held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the contest and that any contest of a primary election must be pursued before the executive committee of the party holding the election. We affirm on the authority of Ex parte Graddick, 495 So.2d 1367 (Ala.1986); Ex parte Baxley, 496 So.2d 688 (Ala.1986); Ex parte Baxley, 494 So.2d 30 (Ala.1986); and Ex parte Skidmore, 277 Ala. 221, 168 So.2d 483 (1964).

AFFIRMED.

HORNSBY, C.J., and MADDOX, ADAMS, HOUSTON, STEAGALL and INGRAM, JJ., concur.

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

SHORES, Justice.

This appeal involves an election contest. The circuit court correctly held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the contest and that any contest of a primary election must be pursued before the executive committee of the party holding the election. We affirm on the authority of Ex parte Graddick, 495 So.2d 1367 (Ala.1986); Ex parte Baxley, 496 So.2d 688 (Ala.1986); Ex parte Baxley, 494 So.2d 30 (Ala.1986); and Ex parte Skidmore, 277 Ala. 221, 168 So.2d 483 (1964).

AFFIRMED.

HORNSBY, C.J., and MADDOX, ADAMS, HOUSTON, STEAGALL and INGRAM, JJ., concur.

Wells v. Eustace, 612 So. 2d 453, 1993 Ala. LEXIS 17, 1993 WL 5556 (Ala. 1993).

Pincite

612 So. 2d 453 (Wells v. Eustace) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related