Legal Opinion

Morris v. Board of Canvassers

West Virginia Supreme Court

Decided April 17, 1901PublishedCited by 43 opinions

Application by Ham Morris, Jr., for writ of mandamus to o board of canvassers of city of Charleston.

1Opinion of the Court

Brannon, President:

At the city election in Charleston, March 11, 1901, Ham Morris and Will W. Wertz were competing nominated candidates for the office of recorder, and the returns showing a tie vote between them, Morris demanded a recount of the ballots, and while that recount was in progress before the city council as a canvassing board the board rejected certain ballots entirely from the recount, because all the candidates appearing to have been voted for were not in the same column on the ballot sheet, this being so as to these two candidates, and Morris applied to. this Court for a writ…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Bowers v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1892
  2. Parvin v. WimbergIndiana Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Marcum v. Ballot Com'rsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Pennington v. HareSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
  5. People Ex Rel. Nichols v. Board of County CanvassersNew York Court of Appeals · 1891

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. Daniel v. SimmsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1901
  2. Baer v. GoreWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Kirkpatrick v. DeegansWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1903
  4. Hatfield v. Board of Canvassers of Mingo Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1925
  5. Kahalekai v. DoiHawaii Supreme Court · 1979

38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API