Legal Opinion

Ex parte Murphy

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1827PublishedCited by 13 opinions

annual election of the corporation of St. Peter’s church in the city of New York, in April last, holden for the choice of 4 trustees, 8 persons were voted for, 4 of w^om ^5- 102 votes, and four, 100. The voting was by ballot. The inspectors having certified that the four having 102 votes, were duly elected, a motion was now made for leave to file an information in nature of a quo warranto *against them, as unduly elected.

Read the full summary

annual election of the corporation of St. Peter’s church in the city of New York, in April last, holden for the choice of 4 trustees, 8 persons were voted for, 4 of w^om ^5- 102 votes, and four, 100. The voting was by ballot. The inspectors having certified that the four having 102 votes, were duly elected, a motion was now made for leave to file an information in nature of a quo warranto *against them, as unduly elected. One ground of the motion that two ballots were put into the box in the names of two persons who were formerly voters; but who had SOme weeks before the day of election. This…

1Opinion of the Court

Curia.

The motion must be denied, For aught that appears, the spurious ballots were for the ticket which, was in the minority. To warrant setting aside the election, it must appear affirmatively, that the successful ticket received a number of improper votes, which, if rejected, would have brought it down to a minority. The mere circumstance that improper votes are received will not vitiate an election. If this were otherwise; hardly an election in the state could be sustained. [1]

Motion denied.(1) If a presiding officer or judge of an election, acting honestly, from the best judgment he can…

2Cited by13 opinions

  1. People Ex Rel. Smith v. PeaseNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
  2. Prince v. SkillinSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1880
  3. Tarbox v. SughrueSupreme Court of Kansas · 1887
  4. Pradat v. RamseyMississippi Supreme Court · 1872
  5. People ex rel. Smith v. PeaseNew York Supreme Court · 1860

8 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