Legal Opinion

Overpeck v. Wiedenman

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided December 22, 1964No. File 10219PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

Because of the public importance of the question, this court in its discretion determined to act in this application for a writ of prohibition involving a request for a recount of votes for Lieutenant Governor in the 1964 general election held November 3rd. Putman v. Pyle, 57 S.D. 250, 232 N.W. 20.

The Board of State Canvassers is by SDC 16.1717 directed to meet on the Thursday following the fourth Monday after the day of election for the purpose of obtaining the returns from all of the counties and proceed to canvass the vote. An adjournment not exceeding twenty days is allowed. In 1964 this…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Putnam v. PyleSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1930
  2. State Ex Rel. Roberts v. MorrisonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1936

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Parham v. Municipal Court, City of Sioux FallsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1972
  2. Parham v. Municipal Court, City of Sioux FallsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1972

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

Powered by the Exa API