Attorney General ex rel. Scott v. Glaser
Michigan Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the several opinions.
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.
A rehearing has been had in this case, and, after full consideration, we feel constrained to-modify in substantial respects the original opinion. In the-former opinion the Court held, in substance, that any mark upon a ballot not appropriate and necessary to express, the voter’s intention should be regarded as a distinguishing mark; and, applying this rule, it was held that when the name of the candidate appeared on two tickets, and a cross was placed in an appropriate place on each ticket, or opposite the name of the candidate on each ticket, neither vote should be counted. This conclusion…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Pease v. PeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1856
- Westbrook v. MillerMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
- Malonny v. MaharMichigan Supreme Court · 1847
- Baker v. Police CommissionersMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
3Cited by15 opinions
- Morris v. Board of CanvassersWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1901
- Peterson v. BillingsMontana Supreme Court · 1939
- City of Detroit v. ChapinMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
- Bloedel v. CromwellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
- Bingham v. BroadwellNebraska Supreme Court · 1905
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.