Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Roach v. Kirk
Citations: 228 Ark. 958; 311 S.W.2d 525; 1958 Ark. LEXIS 656Docket: 5-1512
Court: Supreme Court of Arkansas; March 31, 1958; Arkansas; State Supreme Court
J. Seaboket Holt, Associate Justice, notes that this case has previously been reversed and remanded for a trial on the merits regarding a school election contest focused on the validity of absentee ballots. After trial, the court found that 22 out of 27 absentee ballots cast for Haskell Boach were illegal, leading to a ruling that Elmer Kirk was the duly elected school director of Southside School District No. 3, with a final tally of 107 votes for Kirk and 105 for Boach. The judgment was entered accordingly, prompting Boach's appeal, which raises several points of contention: 1. The court erred in declaring specific absentee votes illegal and in deducting them from Boach’s vote total. 2. The court's findings were not supported by a preponderance of evidence. The excerpt also outlines the relevant Arkansas statutes governing absentee voting procedures, including eligibility criteria, application methods, and the responsibilities of the county clerk in processing absentee ballot requests. Absentee voting is limited to three methods: (a) casting a ballot in person at the county clerk's office during business hours from 15 days before the election until 6:30 p.m. on election day; (b) mailing a ballot that must be received by 6:30 p.m. on election day; and (c) delivering a ballot to the county clerk's office by certain relatives of the absentee voter by the same deadline. In a case analysis, the court determined that Richard Hartlien did not follow any of these methods, as he failed to cast his ballot in person, by mail, or through an eligible relative. Hartlien was not incapacitated and worked near the clerk's office. Lorn Mitchum, also found not to be an unavoidably absent voter, received his absentee ballot unexpectedly and had the opportunity to attend the polls, as he was not physically disabled and spent election day at home. J.S. Calvin was deemed not a qualified absentee voter since he was present in the district but chose to go to Batesville instead of voting, and he had no physical disabilities preventing him from attending the polls. The trial court's findings were supported by substantial evidence. Johnny Mitchum assisted an individual in applying for an absentee ballot at the county clerk's office in Batesville, although the individual was unaware of the application’s contents. He signed a document stating he would be absent due to working, despite not working that day and being present in town. This misrepresentation was acknowledged, and it was determined that the court was justified in deeming his ballot illegal. Acey Duncan's absentee ballot was invalidated as his name did not appear on the required list of applications, and he left the reason for his absence completely blank on his application. According to applicable statutes, failing to provide a reason disqualified him from voting absentee, warranting the court's decision to find his ballot illegal. Mrs. Acey Duncan’s ballot was also invalidated based on sufficient evidence reviewed by the court, although the specifics of this evidence were not detailed. Y. J. Barber, who had moved from School District No. 3 to District 45 shortly before the election, testified about his intent to stay in District 45. The court concluded that he had established residency in District 45, making him unqualified to vote in District 3, where he had not resided for the required period. Consequently, he could not qualify as an absentee voter. The court affirmed the judgment without finding any error.