Ross v. State Board of Elections

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a petition seeking to invalidate an election “is barred as a matter of law by the common law doctrine of laches”
• noting that laches is “a defense in equity against stale claims” (quoting Parker v. Bd. of Election Supervisors, 230 Md. 126, (1962))
• rejecting statutory construction advocated by the State Board of Elections because it was “ ‘unreasonable, illogical, unjust, [and] inconsistent with common sense’ ”
• rejecting statutory construction advocated by the State Board of Elections because it was “ ‘unreasonable, illogical, unjust, [and] inconsistent with common sense’ ”
• delay in filing the complaint until three days after the general election, despite being aware of the facts underlying the complaint over three weeks earlier
• “[L]aches must include an unjustifiable delay and some amount of prejudice to the defendant”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).