Opinion

Bellmon v. Albert

  • 648 P.2d 1207
  • 1982 OK 78
  • 1982 Okla. LEXIS 339
Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Filed
Jun 25, 1982
Status
Published
Author
Barnes
On the bench
Ala, Barnes, Doolin, Hargrave, Hodges, Irwin, Lavender, Opala, Simms, Wilson
Cited by
5 cases

The opinion

BARNES, Vice Chief Justice,

dissenting.

I concur in the dissent of Justice Simms, but I dissent for the further reason that I do not believe that the Referee’s Report is comprehensive enough to allow me to properly evaluate it. I would ask the Referee for a supplemental report setting out his reasons for admitting some signatures in a particular category while excluding others. As pointed out in the Protestants’ Motion for Order Requiring Supplemental Referee’s Report, it does not indicate which 10,-579 of the 16,227 names challenged were invalid, nor why certain names were valid and others were not. Before I can make a final decision on the sufficiency of the signatures I need to know the criteria used by the referee to disqualify names on the petition for non-registration.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.