Legal Opinion · Dissent

Eikmeier v. Steffen

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 3, 1915No. Nos. 19,584—(201)Published

Herman Eikmeier and others, legal voters in the county of Pipestone, appealed to the district court for the county from the canvass and declared result of the county canvassing board of that county of the election held on June 7, 1915, under the provisions of Laws 1915, p. 24, c. 23, on the question whether the sale of intoxicating liquor should be prohibited, wherein the canvassing board declared there were 1,069 votes in favor of and 1,073 votes against the proposition.

Read the full summary

Herman Eikmeier and others, legal voters in the county of Pipestone, appealed to the district court for the county from the canvass and declared result of the county canvassing board of that county of the election held on June 7, 1915, under the provisions of Laws 1915, p. 24, c. 23, on the question whether the sale of intoxicating liquor should be prohibited, wherein the canvassing board declared there were 1,069 votes in favor of and 1,073 votes against the proposition. The county of Pipe-stone and its auditor appeared and prayed that the appeal be dismissed. John Steffen and others,…

1DissentHallam, J.

I dissent from the proposition that an unintelligible vote is' to be counted as a “vote” in determining whether a majority of the votes at a county option election has been cast in favor of prohibition. The statute provides “the voter shall mark a cross in one of the * * * squares to express his choice.” Laws 1915, p. 27, c. 23, § 7. It then provides “the ballots shall be * * * counted * * * in accordance with the law governing general elections for county officers.” The law governing general elections for county officers provides “only those so marked shall be counted.” G. S. 1913, § 460.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Peacock v. Village Council of OsakisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
  2. Lodoen v. City CouncilSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1912
  3. Anderson v. City of Le SueurSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
  4. McLaughlin v. Village of Rush CitySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913

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

Powered by the Exa API