Case Name: The People ex rel. Stoop et al. v. Lawson et al.
Court: Colorado Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Colorado
Decision Date: 1906-01
Citations: 36 Colo. 442
Docket Number: No. 5704
Parties: The People ex rel. Stoop et al. v. Lawson et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Colorado Reports
Volume: 36
Pages: 442–444

Head Matter:
[No. 5704.]
The People ex rel. Stoop et al. v. Lawson et al.
Former Opinion Followed.
The question involved in. this case was passed upon and determined in Dunton v. People ex rel. Ailcin et'al., 36 Colo. 128.
Error to the District Court of Otero County.
Eon. N. Walter Dixon, Judge.
Action by the people on the relation of Frank I). Stoop and Andrew Nicholes against J. E. Lawson and P. J. Eeifel. From an order sustaining a demurrer to the complaint, plaintiff brings error.
Reversed.
Mr. W. B. Gobin and Mr. E. C. Glenn, for plaintiffs in error.
Mr. E. S. Beall, Mr. F. A. Sabin and Mr. S. H. White, for defendants in error.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice Bailey
delivered the opinion of the court:
The complaint in this action alleged that Eocky Ford was a city of the second class and that in the election held therein on the 4th day of April, 1905, for the purpose of electing aldermen from the first ward, plaintiffs in error received the greatest number of votes cast for such offices in such ward; that, notwithstanding this, defendants in error have usurped and intruded into such offices and are exercising the duties thereof; and praying* for judgment of ouster against respondents and that relators be placed in possession of such offices.
To this complaint a demurrer was filed and the contention was and is that the complaint is defective in that it fails to show tlmt relators received a majority of all of the votes cast in the entire city.
The trial court sustained the demurrer and the matter comes here on error.
The question involved herein was disposed of in Dunton v. People of the State of Colorado ex rel. Aikin et al., 36 Colo. 128, just decided.
The judgment will be reversed and the cause, remanded'with instructions to overrule the demurrer, and if the matter is further litigated it will be for the sole purpose of determining as to who, according to the official canvass, received the greatest number of votes cast in the first ward for aldermen.
Reversed.
Chief Justice Gabbert and Mr. Justice Goddard concur. _