Sudler v. Lankford

Citations

• 82 Md. 142
• 33 A. 455
• 1895 Md. LEXIS 105

Syllabus

<p>Election Law — Appointment of Ballot Clerks — Rights of Minority Supervisor of Election — Mandamus—Proof of Allegations Therein.</p> <p>Under the Acts of 1890, ch. 538, sec. 152, and 1891, ch. 701, where two Democratic and one Republican Supervisors of Elections were appointed for a certain county, if all the supervisors do not agree as to the appointment of a Republican ballot clerk, then the Republican Supervisor has the right to submit the names of three eligible Republicans for appointment as ballot clerk, and the Democratic Supervisors are bound to select one of the three names.</p> <p>The performance of this duty is ministerial and may be enforced by mandamus.</p> <p>A petition for a mandamus should state all the necessary facts, and therefore in this case a petition by the minority supervisor should state that the names of the persons submitted by him for appointment as ballot clerk were the names of persons eligible under the statute.</p> <p>If the defendant in an application for a mandamus fails to answer the petition, the Court hears the case ex parte, i. e. the petitioner is allowed to offer such proof as may be necessary to satisfy the Court of the truth of his allegations, and the writ cannot be ordered until the Court is so satisfied both as to the law and the facts. If a demurrer is filed to the petition, the Court has no right to order the writ without proof of some kind.</p>