State ex rel. Bancroft v. Stumpf
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Action in tbe nature of a quo warranto, to try respondent’s title to the office of treasurer of Portage county. The questions considered arose upon demurrer to the answer; but the pleadings are no longer on file here.
Read the full summary
Action in tbe nature of a quo warranto, to try respondent’s title to the office of treasurer of Portage county. The questions considered arose upon demurrer to the answer; but the pleadings are no longer on file here. It appears that the complaint alleged that the relator received a majority of the votes cast for the office in question at the last preceding election ; and that the answer, denying this allegation, averred, among other things, that a majority of the votes cast in the town of Stevens’ Point were included in the number claimed to have been cast for the relator in said county ;…
1Opinion of the CourtCole, J.
It appears to us that the only part of the answer which can reasonably be claimed to be good on the demurrer, is that which relates to the election at the town of Stevens’ .Point It is alleged that there were but two inspectors of election for that town. Other irregularities in the manner of conducting the election in that town, and in the canvassing and return of the votes, are stated in the answer; but the most serious objection is, that there were only two inspectors. It is insisted that this error renders the election in that town absolutely void, and that all the votes cast at that poll…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Blackman v. Town of DunkirkWisconsin Supreme Court · 1865
3Cited by5 opinions
- Gilleland v. SchuylerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1872
- Application of ClarkWisconsin Supreme Court · 1908
- Carabajal v. SandovalNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1916
- State v. SwearingenMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908
- McNally v. TollanderCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1980