Scully v. Town of Westport, 103974
| Decision Date | 23 October 1957 |
| Docket Number | No. 103974,103974 |
| Citation | 137 A.2d 352,20 Conn.Supp. 399 |
| Court | Connecticut Superior Court |
| Parties | Albert T. SCULLY et al. v. TOWN OF WESTPORT. |
Senie & Stock, Westport, for plaintiffs.
Daniel B. Bradley, Westport, and Goldstein & Peck, Bridgeport, for defendant.
This is an action for a declaratory judgment. The question upon which advice is desired arises out of provisions in the charter for the town of Westport, passed by the General Assembly at its January, 1957, session and approved in a referendum held in the town of Westport on July 19, 1957.
The plaintiffs include electors of the town and candidates for the board of selectmen in the election to be held on November 5, 1957. There were originally other questions, but by agreement of the parties it is now requested that the court advise whether or not the provisions of the charter in chapter 3, § 1, specifying that '[n]o elector shall cast more than one combined vote for first selectman and one other selectman,' violates any of the following provisions of the constitution of Connecticut: (A) Article Tenth, § 2 (as amended). 'Each town shall, annually, or biennially, as the electors of the town may determine, elect selectmen and such officers of local police as the laws may prescribe.' (B) Article Sixth, § 3. 'Every elector shall be eligible to any office in this state, except in cases provided for in this constitution.' (C) Article Sixth, § 5. 'Laws shall be made to support the privilege of free suffrage, prescribing the manner of regulating and conducting meetings of the electors, and prohibiting, under adequate penalties, all undue influence therein, from power, bribery, tumult, and other improper conduct.' (D) Article First, § 1. 'That all men when they form a social compact, are equal in rights; and that no man, or set of men are entitled to exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community.'
Chapter 3, § 1, of the Westport charter reads as follows:
Plaintiffs complain that under above charter provisions (a) the elector has lost his right to split his ticket and vote for selectmen on an individual basis; (b) the majority has lost its right to exert its will as far as the election of the members of the board is concerned; (c) no individual can file a nominating petition and run alone for the office of selectman (other than first selectman) and hope to be elected.
In stating their claims, plaintiffs are under a misapprehension as to the power of the General Assembly...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Susan Bysiewicz v. Dinardo
...see also Mills v. Gaynor, 136 Conn. 632, 639, 73 A.2d 823 (1950) (provision inapplicable to town officers); *793 Scully v. Westport, 20 Conn.Supp. 399, 402, 137 A.2d 352 (1957) (same). "A constitutional office is understood to be one expressly named in and created by [a] constitution, where......
-
Bysiewicz v. Dinardo
...see also Mills v. Gaynor, 136 Conn. 632, 639, 73 A.2d 823 (1950) (provision inapplicable to town officers); Scully v. Westport, 20 Conn. Sup. 399, 402, 137 A.2d 352 (1957) (same). ''A constitutional office is understood to be one expressly named in and created by [a] constitution, whereas a......
-
Scully v. Town of Westport
...himself of the write-in procedure. For the purposes of this appeal we accept this construction of the charter. See Scully v. Town of Westport, 20 Conn.Sup. 399, 137 A.2d 352. The candidates of each political party for first selectman and selectman were listed together on the ballot labels o......