Maynard v. Layne
| Decision Date | 28 March 1955 |
| Docket Number | 10737,Nos. 10742,s. 10742 |
| Citation | 140 W.Va. 819,86 S.E.2d 733 |
| Court | West Virginia Supreme Court |
| Parties | P. B. MAYNARD and J. B. Porter, v. John LAYNE, Walter Jude, Leonard Esteppe, Wallace Farley and P. B. Maynard (Mayor), as Members of and Comprising the Council of the City of Williamson, West Virginia. John LAYNE v. Walter JUDE, Leonard Esteppe, Wallace Farley, and P. B. Maynard (Mayor), as Members of and Comprising the Council of the City of Williamson, West Virginia. |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. Under the charter of the City of Williamson, Chapter 136, Acts of the Legislature, 1933, Regular Session, as amended by Chapter 139, Acts of the Legislature, 1935, Regular Session and the voters of such city on May 2, 1939, Section 15, Chapter 60, Acts of the Legislature, 1945, Regular Session, is applicable to the appointment of primary election precinct boards; and it is the mandatory duty of the Council of such city to appoint a receiving board consisting of three commissioners and two poll clerks; and a counting board consisting of three commissioners and two poll clerks for each precinct in that city containing four hundred or more voters, according to the registration lists used by the municipality in receiving votes cast at a municipal primary election.
2. The ordinance passed by the Council of the City of Williamson on February 1, 1940, is a valid exercise of the corporate powers granted by the charter, relating as it does to the appointment of double boards for the election precincts in that city, and such council is bound by it.
3. In a proceeding in mandamus where two reasons exist for granting the writ, though either would suffice, this Court may use both reasons.
Bias & Bias, E. Gaujot Bias, Wade H. Bronson, Jr., Williamson, for plaintiffs in error.
Harry W. Hill, Lafe P. Ward, Williamson, for defendants in error.
H. G. Williamson, for relator.
Bias & Bias, E. Gaujot Bias, Wade H. Bronson, Jr., Williamson, for respondents.
LOVINS, President.
This opinion states reasons for the actions of this Court in two proceedings in mandamus. One proceeding in mandamus was instituted by P. B. Maynard and J. B. Porter before the Judge of the Circuit Court of Mingo County in vacation. The relators in that proceeding are residents and citizens of the City of Williamson. Both are candidates for the office of mayor in said City in the primary election to be held therein on the 12th day of April, 1955. The defendants in the above proceeding are John Layne, Walter Jude, Leonard Esteppe, Wallace Farley, as members of the council of the City of Williamson.
The other is an original proceeding brought in this Court by John Layne, a candidate for the office of mayor of the City of Williamson at the municipal election to be held April 12, 1955 and is against Walter Jude, Leonard Esteppe, Wallace Farley and P. B. Maynard (Mayor), as members of the council of the City of Williamson.
The precise question involved in both proceedings is: Whether it is the imperative duty of the council of the City of Williamson to appoint double election boards for all of the nine precincts of such city to hold the municipal primary election to be held therein, as above stated.
The proceeding instituted by P. B. Maynard v. Council of the City of Williamson, No. 10742, was commenced in the Circuit Court of Mingo County. The Judge of that Court issued a rule. Upon the return day of the rule, March 21, 1955, the Judge heard the proceeding and awarded a peremptory writ of mandamus requiring the defendants to appoint double election boards in all of the precincts of the City of Williamson for the municipal primary election to be held in such city on April 12, 1955; ordered that the Council of the City of Williamson should meet on the 22nd day of March, 1955, and adjourn from day to day until this Court decided the question arising in the original proceeding.
The defendants in the proceeding heretofore pending before the Judge of the Circuit Court of Mingo County applied for a writ of error from this Court, which was granted.
The parties in the proceeding of P. B. Maynard v. Walter Jude, No. 10742 stipulated that the writ of error granted, as above stated, should be consolidated and heard with the original proceeding pending in this Court. This stipulation was approved by counsel for John Layne.
The original proceeding was heard upon the petition of relators; the answers and demurrer of the defendants; the stipulations of counsel and briefs and arguments of counsel for the relator, John Layne and the relators P. B. Maynard and J. B. Porter, as well as counsel for the defendants in both the proceedings.
There is no dispute in the facts presented by the records in both proceedings and no evidence was presented. It is a question of law and as stated above, the questions in the proceeding in the Circuit Court and in this Court are the same.
The City of Williamson was incorporated by a special charter enacted by the Legislature, 1933, as Chapter 136, Acts of the Legislature, Regular Session, of that year. The special charter, so far as pertinent, provided that the city officers should be nominated by conventions and further provided that an election should be held on the first Tuesday in May, 1934 and on the first Tuesday in May of each third year thereafter; that the council should hold a meeting '* * * for the purpose of making all arrangements and preparations for the holding of such election * * *' and specifically provided as follows: '* * * And at such meeting the council of the city shall appoint three qualified voters of the city as commissioners of election for each voting precinct in said city. * * *' The qualification of such commissioners paraphrases the general election law on that subject and provides for their appointment from lists presented by the city executive committees of the two political parties which cast the highest number of votes at the preceding regular election.
The next amendment to the charter of the City of Williamson will be found in Chapter 139, Acts of the Legislature, 1935, Regular Session. It is unnecessary to state the provisions of Chapter 139, id., so far as pertinent, as the provisions of that chapter coincide with Chapter 136, Acts of the Legislature, 1933, id.
Another amendment was adopted by the voters of the City of Williamson on May 2, 1939, under the provisions of the Home Rule Amendment. Such amendment provides for the nomination of city officials by a primary election. The last amendment further provides that Primary Election Amendment to the City of Williamson, Section 13, subparagraphs (f) and (g).
The next action by the City of Williamson relating to election boards will be found in an ordinance...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
W. E. Long Co.-Independent Bakers' Co-op. v. Burdett
...Company v. O'Brien, 142 W.Va. 451, 96 S.E.2d 171; State ex rel. Revercomb v. O'Brien, 141 W.Va. 662, 91 S.E.2d 865; Maynard v. Layne, 140 W.Va. 819, 86 S.E.2d 733; State ex rel. Board of Governors of West Virginia University v. Sims, 140 W.Va. 64, 82 S.E.2d 321; Duncan v. The County Court o......
-
State ex rel. Revercomb v. O'Brien
...Draper v. Anderson, 102 W.Va. 633, 135 S.E. 837; Duncan v. County Court of Cabell County, 138 W.Va. 106, 75 S.E.2d 97; and Maynard v. Layne, W.Va. 86 S.E.2d 733. This Court holds that upon the record presented to it, the relators have a clear legal right to the performance of the acts deman......