Neil v. Pile, 9568.
| Decision Date | 17 October 1934 |
| Docket Number | No. 9568.,9568. |
| Citation | 75 S.W.2d 899 |
| Parties | NEIL et al. v. PILE et al. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Cameron County; A. M. Kent, Judge.
Action by Dan Neil and others against Leo V. Pile (Carlos Zepeda) and others, to set aside a certificate of election issued to defendants declaring them to have been elected directors of the Cameron county water improvement district No. 16, and to have contestants declared elected as such directors. From an adverse judgment, contestants appeal.
Reversed and rendered.
Galbraith & Goodrich, of Brownsville, for appellants.
Seabury, George & Taylor, of Brownsville, for appellees.
Appellants, Dan Neil, L. C. Brown, H. W. Schneider, and M. G. Taft, instituted this cause of action in the civil district court of Cameron county against appellees, Carlos Zepeda, Claud Macey, H. D. Kirk, and August Weilandt, seeking to set aside a certificate of election issued to appellees declaring them to have been elected directors of the Cameron county water improvement district No. 16, and to have appellants declared elected as such directors.
Upon a hearing of the case, the trial judge sustained challenges to a number of votes and declared the result of the election to be a tie by a vote of seven to seven. Appellants, who were the contestants below, bring this appeal.
The trial judge sustained challenges to twenty votes, because they were cast by persons who presented only 1933 poll tax receipts. The election was held on January 9, 1933, and only persons who held 1932 poll tax receipts were qualified to vote, unless they were exempt from the payment of a poll tax under some provision of the law.
The evidence shows that the presiding judge of the election permitted persons who presented 1933 poll tax receipts to vote, and that these particular twenty voters so voted. The evidence does not show whether or not these voters also possessed 1932 poll tax receipts or whether they were assessed for a poll tax for the year 1931, commonly called the 1932 poll tax, or whether or not they were entitled to vote without the payment of a poll tax under some provision of the law.
We conclude that the evidence was insufficient to support the action of the trial judge in declaring these votes illegal and refusing to count them for appellees. It is quite true that the officers of an election may refuse to permit a voter to vote who does not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thomas v. Groebl
...206 S.W. 958; Turner v. Teller, Tex.Civ.App., 275 S.W. 115; State ex rel. Paggi v. Fletcher, Tex.Civ.App., 50 S.W.2d 450; Neil v. Pile, Tex.Civ.App., 75 S.W.2d 899: Stratton v. Hall, Tex.Civ.App., 90 S.W.2d 865; Lee v. Whitehead, Tex.Civ.App., 182 S.W.2d 744; State ex rel. Sharp v. Martin, ......
-
Solis v. Martinez
...and that such person is a legal voter. Willow Hole Independent School District v. Smith, Tex.Civ.App., 123 S.W.2d 708; Neil v. Pile, Tex.Civ.App., 75 S.W.2d 899; Schwander v. Davis, Tex.Civ.App., 69 S.W.2d The burden of going forward with the evidence has been well summarized: (1) The burde......
-
Willow Hole Independent School Dist. v. Smith
...v. Jester, 53 Tex.Civ.App. 306, 115 S.W. 278, par. 4; Linger v. Balfour, Tex.Civ.App., 149 S.W. 795, pars. 40 and 42; Neil v. Pile, Tex. Civ. App., 75 S.W.2d 899, pars. 1 and Appellant contends that the fact that said 26 persons were all within the taxable ages and had not paid a poll tax c......
-
Lucchese v. Mauermann, 11612.
...to show that they are illegal votes. 16 Tex.Jur., § 145, p. 190; Pippin v. Holland, Tex.Civ. App., 146 S.W.2d 266; Neil v. Pile, Tex. Civ.App., 75 S.W.2d 899; Willow Hole Independent School District v. Smith, Tex. Civ.App., 123 S.W.2d Appellants attempted to show that these voters were disq......