Neal v. Manning

• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: STITES, Justice.
• Citation: Neal v. Manning, 266 Ky. 683, 99 S.W.2d 766 (Ky. Ct. App. 1936)
• Decision Date: 18 December 1936
• Parties: NEAL v. MANNING et al.

99 S.W.2d 766

266 Ky. 683

NEAL v. MANNING et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

December 18, 1936

Appeal from Circuit Court, Whitley County.

Action by J.W. Neal against J.L. Manning and others. From an order sustaining a special demurrer to the petition, plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

Blakely & Murphy and John T. Murphy, all of Covington, for appellant.

W.R Henry, of Williamsburg, for appellees.

STITES Justice.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the Whitley circuit court sitting in equity. The plaintiff, who is appellant here, is engaged in the business of selling liquor in Whitley county. He brought this suit to enjoin the county judge, county clerk, sheriff, and the members of the election commission of Whitley county from certifying or placing on the order book of the county court the result of a local option election held on September 19, 1936, under the provisions of section 1 of the Acts of 1936, c. 1 (Ky.Stats., 1936 Ed., § 2554c-1 et seq.). A special demurrer was sustained to the petition on the ground that the Whitley circuit court was without jurisdiction, and, plaintiff declining to plead further, his petition was dismissed. This appeal followed.

It is alleged that the petitions filed with the county judge requesting that a local option election be held did not contain the signatures of 25 per cent, of the legal voters of the county and that the election is therefore void. Several other objections to the procedure or form of the election are asserted in the petition by way of conclusion, but the question of the sufficiency of the signatures to the petition filed before the county judge is the only point argued. It is claimed that a sufficient number of the names of voters on the petition for the election to reduce the total below 25 per cent. (1) were not registered, (2) did not give post office addresses and dates of signing, (3) were signed by one person without the consent or knowledge of the person whose name was signed, (4) were signed on blank pages of paper without containing any caption showing the purpose for which the signatures were obtained, (5) were not dated by the person signing but were dated by some one else, and (6) were not subscribed with post office address, but such addresses were later inserted by some one else. It is argued that as a result of the defects in the petition for the election, the election itself is entirely void, and injunction is therefore a...