State ex rel. Doerflinger v. Hilmantel
Wisconsin Supreme Court
At tbe annual election for county officers of Milwaukee county, in November, 1866, Hilmcmbel received a majority of tbe votes cast for tbe office of clerk of tbe board of supervisors of said county; and, having received tbe certificate of election, be entered upon the duties of the office.
Read the full summary
At tbe annual election for county officers of Milwaukee county, in November, 1866, Hilmcmbel received a majority of tbe votes cast for tbe office of clerk of tbe board of supervisors of said county; and, having received tbe certificate of election, be entered upon the duties of the office. Tbe complainant was tbe opposing candidate for said office at tbat election, and brought this action to try 3ilma/nteVs title, alleging that a portion of the votes cast for the latter, greater in number than his majority, were received in violation of the provisions of the registry act, chap. 445, Laws of…
1Opinion of the CourtDixoN, C. J.
The book produced from the office of the clerk of the city of Milwaukee, called in the bill of exceptions “ poll-list or register number three,” bears indubitable evidence on its face of having been altered or added to after the time prescribed by law for revising, correcting and' completing the annual lists of voters. As urged by counsel, it appears on its face that the additions must have been made on the day of the election, and at the place where the votes were received. The additional names were written in pencil, and not in ink, as were the names of all other persons regularly appearing…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Owens v. State ex rel. JennettTexas Supreme Court · 1885
- Brisbin v. ClearySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1879
- State v. SmithSupreme Court of Iowa · 1896
- McRobbie v. Registrars of Voters of IpswichMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1948
- Ferguson v. AllenUtah Supreme Court · 1891
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.