Court Opinion

ID: 9847712
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 04:05:48.841142+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:28.593597
License: Public Domain

Clarke, Chief Justice,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent.
I would not hold that any of the allegations in this petition are sufficiently specific to satisfy the requirements of the statute. Under the statute, a petition for recall does more than set the stage for proceedings which can be narrowed by an official answer, discovery, motions, etc. The petition raises the curtain and begins a drama which has the potential for benefit or disaster to the public interest. The official sought to be recalled should not be forced to answer overbroad allegations nor should the public be faced with deciding its interest based on such allegations.
I would hold that a bare allegation of certain laws and policies without statements of the time, place and manner of the violations falls short of that which the law requires. This would not just give additional protection to the officeholder, it would protect the public against vague attacks which result in governmental instability.
*282Walbert & Hermann, David F. Walbert, Jerry W. Loftin, for appellee.