Legal Opinion · Dissent

Hayes v. City of Sheridan

Wyoming Supreme Court

Decided February 2, 2005No. 04-70Published

1Dissent

WALDRIP, D.J.,

dissenting.

[¶ 10] I respectfully dissent. The majority reads the pertinent part of Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 22-23-301 (LexisNexis 2003) to exclude any requirement that a candidate for municipal office not be a municipal employee. In so concluding, the majority relies upon the plain language of the statute. However, § 22-23-301 specifically states: “In order to be eligible, a candidate must be a registered voter and a resident of the municipality and ward which he seeks to represent on the day the petition is filed, and shall not be an employee of the municipality.” Id. (emphasis…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Ernest N. Morial v. Judiciary Commission of the State of LouisianaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1977
  2. Worcester v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 2001
  3. Oklahoma State Election Board v. CoatsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1980
  4. Blair v. HarrisHawaii Supreme Court · 2002
  5. Acevedo v. City of North PoleAlaska Supreme Court · 1983

5 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