Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Gallagher v. Keefe

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided January 15, 1999No. Docket 206705Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJansen, J.

I concur with the majority that plaintiff has standing to bring this suit under MCR 3.306(B)(2) and that laches does not bar plaintiff’s action. I respectfully dissent, however, from the majority’s conclusion that defendant did not satisfy state-law eligibility requirements for a candidate in the primary election.

In Line v Bd of Election Canvassers of Menominee Co, 154 Mich 329, 332; 117 NW 730 (1908), our Supreme Court held that a primary election is not an election to public office, but is merely the selection of candidates for office by the members of a political party in a manner having…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Boyd v. W G Wade ShowsMichigan Supreme Court · 1993
  2. City of Grand Rapids v. HarperMichigan Court of Appeals · 1971
  3. Line v. Board of Election CanvassersMichigan Supreme Court · 1908
  4. Ferency v. Secretary of StateMichigan Court of Appeals · 1991
  5. Okros v. MyslakowskiMichigan Court of Appeals · 1976

1 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