Board of Supervisors of Pima County v. Harrington
Arizona Supreme Court
1Dissent
UDALL, Chief Justice and JOHNSON, Justice
(dissenting).
We wholly disagree with the majority opinion reversing the judgment of the lower court. It is- our view that all four of the appellees, as candidates for public office, were entitled to a place on the general election ballot under the column headed “Other Candidates”. Our dissent was noted in the minute order of October 16, 1958, and we now state our reasons therefor.
Our general views on the scope, purpose and operation of the laws governing the right of a qualified elector who as- a private citizen seeks to procure a nomination, other…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Local 266, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement & Power DistrictArizona Supreme Court · 1954
- State v. PhelpsArizona Supreme Court · 1948
- Morgan v. Board of Sup'rsArizona Supreme Court · 1948
- Reichenberger v. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement & Power DistrictArizona Supreme Court · 1944
- Cavender v. Board of Supervisors of Pima CountyArizona Supreme Court · 1958
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.