Legal Opinion · Dissent

State Ex Rel. Williamson v. Carter

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided July 17, 1936No. 27320Published

1DissentRiley, J.

The rule of law stated in the syllabus of the majority opinion is contrary to former decisions of this court wherein the phrase “next election held throughout the state,” as used in section 3, art. 5, Constitution, is designated as the time an initiated measure shall be placed upon the ballot.

Six years ago this court, without dissenting voice, held in Looney v. Leeper, 145 Okla. 202, 292 P. 365:

“When * * * a proposed constitutional amendment is agreed to * * * it becomes the duty of the Secretary of State to refer the proposal to the people for their approval or rejection * * * as directed in…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. In Re Initiative Petition No. 2 of CushingSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1932
  2. Atwater v. HassettSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
  3. Associated Industries v. Oklahoma Tax CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
  4. State Ex Rel. Babb v. MathewsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
  5. Looney v. LeeperSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1930

2 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