Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

157 Tex. 182

300 S.W.2d 623

Vicars v. Stokely

Texas Supreme Court

Decided March 13, 1957

Texas Supreme Court · decided 1957-03-13

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““The Court of Civil Appeals has held in this case that • ballots should not be counted when the corresponding stubs do not bear the signature of the voter. 296 S.W.2d 603 -604, 605-607. That holding is in conflict with the holding of the El Paso Court of Civil Appeals in Fox v. Nail, 294 S.W.2d 407, 409 . On the question indicated a majority of this Court agree with the holding of the Court of Civil Appeals in the instant case.””

quoted by 1 later decision, including Bagley v. Holt

Relies on Vicars v. Stokely · Fox v. Nail

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1957-03-13

How this case has been cited

Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently February 2018 · most notably Jones v. Strayhorn (1959), Duncan v. Willis (1957)

41 state decisions

2201957196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM

¶1 This case involves an election contest.

¶2 We have jurisdiction of the case under Articles 1728 and 1821, Vernon’s Annotated Texas Statutes, because the judges of the Court of Civil Appeals disagreed upon a question of law material to the decision of the case. 296 S.W. 2d 599. We also have jurisdiction under such Articles because the Court of Civil Appeals has held differently from a prior decision of another Court of Civil Appeals upon a question of law material to the decision of the case.

¶3*183 The Court of Civil Appeals has held in this case that ballots should not be counted when the corresponding stubs do not bear the signature of the voter. 296 S.W. 2d 603-604, 605-607. That holding is in conflict with the holding of the El Paso Court of Civil Appeals in Fox v. Nail, 294 S.W. 2d 407,409. On the question indicated we agree with the holding of the Court of Civil Appeals in the instant case.

¶4 The order on the application for writ of error in the instant case will be “Refused. No reversible error.” Rule 483, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.

¶5 Opinion delivered March 13, 1957.

/157/tex/182 · .json · Public domain