The silver state. [volume] (Winnemucca, Nev.) 1909-1925, 1922-12-02
ALL READY FOR
ROUND THREE
Petition Has Been Filed With the
Supreme Court Asking for .
Rehearing of the District
Attorneyship Contest

Attorneys ]. w. Dignon, and Nc
Carran & Mashburn of Reno, and
Warren & Hawkins Of this city, act
ing as counsel for Harry Warren,
have filed with the supreme court a
petition for a re-hearing in the
Warren Wilson district attorney
election contest case.
i By those who are conversant with
the facts in the case it will be re-
called that the supreme court re-
versed the decree Of Judge Taber,
the trial Judge, who found, after
several days close attention to the
evidence, that Harry Warren had
been legally nominated by the
Democrats of Humboldt county to
make the race for district attorney
and that the county commissioners,
sitting as a board Of canvassers of
the election results har cred in
declaring Wilson the nominee.
Judge Taber, in arriving at his
decision, construed some ballots that
had been marked with pencils as
valid, but the supreme court held
to the contrary, reversed Judge
Taber, and declared Wilson the
nominee.
In the petition for re-hearing the
counsel for Warren direct attention
of the supreme court to the fact
that the decision that august body
rendered was improperly arrived
at and along that line the petition
reads:
IF this court was a trial court,
we can readily see how it might be
possible for the court to direct its
attention principally to the ballots
themselves, and, in SO doing, take
into consideration any defects that
might appear upon the face Of any
ballot under consideration. But
when this court seeks to review the
rulings Of the trial court, it can do
so only in those instances where
the error complained of is brought
to the attention of the court in the
manner required by law. 1t occurs
to us, and it appears to US from the
opinions rendered by this court
herein, that this court, in its haste,
confined its Investigations largely to
the ballots themselves and mad
vertently based its opinion herein
upon such examination Of the bal
lots. In looking over the ballots
this court discovered three pencil
marked ballots for respondent and
decided as a matter of law that
those ballots should not have been
, counted for respondent. But this
court overlooked the fact that it
was entirely without authority to
decide this question, for the very
simple reason that no such question
was taken before this court, either
by objections, exceptions or as
signment of errors. In short, this
court rendered a judgement upon
an issue that was not before it.
The objections, exceptions and as
signment of errors are the plead
ings upon which the appellant re-
lies for relief in this court. If his
Ipleadings fail to state cause Of ac-
tion in his favor this court is with
out jurisdiction and no amount Of
evidence will entitle appellant to
any affirmative relief. This court
never examined the pleadings in
this case. Respondent never had
opportunity to present proper OBJ
jections and to call this courts at
tention to the fact that the court
was wholly without jurisdiction here
in, by reason of the failure Of ap-
pellant's pleadings to state cause
for any affirmative relief. We
know that this situation, so far as
respondent is concerned, arose by
reason Of inordinate haste in this
matter, and we sincerely believe
that the same haste was responsible
for the courts actions in this cause.