Norris v. Cross, Secretary of State
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Petition for mandamus by Joe JEL Norris ana others against Bill Cross, Secretary of State. Citing: 19 Cyc. 530; Naylor v. Moody, 2 Blackf. (Ind.) 249; Wilkinson v.- Elliott, 43 Kan. 590; State v. HockadaAj, 98 Mo. 590; Betteson v. Budd, 21 Ark. 578; Railway Go. v. Walton, 42 Fla. 54; Peterson v. Taylor, 15 Ga. 484; 13 A. & E. Ene.
Read the full summary
Petition for mandamus by Joe JEL Norris ana others against Bill Cross, Secretary of State. Citing: 19 Cyc. 530; Naylor v. Moody, 2 Blackf. (Ind.) 249; Wilkinson v.- Elliott, 43 Kan. 590; State v. HockadaAj, 98 Mo. 590; Betteson v. Budd, 21 Ark. 578; Railway Go. v. Walton, 42 Fla. 54; Peterson v. Taylor, 15 Ga. 484; 13 A. & E. Ene. L. 13; State Board of Equalization v. People éx rel., 191 Ill. 528; Atty Gen. v. Boston, 123 Mass. 460; State ex rel. v. Railway Go., 19 Wash.- 518; ITentz v. Moul-ton, 7 S. Dak. 272 ; Gomm’rs v. King, 13 Fla. 457 ; Oomm.w. ex rel. v. Gomm’rs, 37 Pa. St; 237; State…
1Opinion of the Court
..Hates, J.
This is an original action in this court in which relators ask for a, peremptory writ of mandamus against respondent, as Secretary of State, to compel him to stamp ás filed), and to examine and ascertain the sufficiency ,of certáin referendum pe- " ' titions alleged' to have been filed with him, requesting that the act passed by the Second Legislature, known as Senate Bill No. 179, be referred to the people for their approval or rejection. There- is but little, if any, controversy about the facts in- this proceeding, and it is unnecessary to state in full the pleadings. At the…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Marbury v. MadisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1803
- Kendall v. United States Ex Rel. StokesSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
- Decatur v. PauldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1840
- United States v. SchurzSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Butterworth v. United States Ex Rel. HoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by65 opinions
- Threadgill v. Cross, Secretary of StateSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- In Re Initiative Petition No. 314Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1980
- Pioneer Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. StateSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
- Dunham v. ArderySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
- In Re Initiative Petition No. 281, St. Question No. 441Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1967
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.