Allen v. Burrow

Citations

• 69 Kan. 812
• 77 P. 555
• 1904 Kan. LEXIS 340

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1.. Elections—Provision for State Contest BoardUpheld—Case Affirmed. The provision of the Australian-ballot law creating a. special tribunal for the settlement of disputes regarding nominations for public office, and making its decisions final, is not unconstitutional as granting judicial powers to executive officers, or as impairing the original jurisdiction of the supreme court. The case of Miller v. Clark, 62 Kan. 278, 62 Pac. 66á, is affirmed.</p> <p>2. --- Determination of Contest Board Final unless Prior Corrupt Agreement be Shown. A dispute over which of two persons is the regular nominee of a political party for a public-office can ordinarily be settled only by the special tribunal to-which the statute commits the determination of such questions, but if it be established that a majority of the members of such tribunal have entered into a corrupt agreement with one of the-parties to give him the decision, regardless of the merits of the-case, the courts will take jurisdiction of the controversy, and decide it, in a proceeding in mandamus to compel the certification of the proper name for printing on the official ballot.</p>