Pullen v. Mulligan

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that votes could be recounted by manual means to the extent that the voter's intent could be determined with reasonable certainty, despite the existence of a statute which provided that punch card ballots were to be recounted by automated tabulation equipment
• “Courts have no inherent power to hear election contests, but may do so only when authorized by statute and in the manner dictated by statute.”
• “Courts have no inherent power to hear election contests, but may do so only when authorized by statute and in the manner dictated by statute.”
• \Literal compliance with directory provisions will not be required if it appears that the spirit of the law has not been violated and the result of the election has been fairly ascertained.\
• “Failure to comply with a mandatory provision renders the affected ballots void, whereas technical violations of directory provisions do not affect the validity of the affected ballots.”
• court lacks jurisdiction where petitioner fails to timely file an election contest

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).