MAHONEY
v.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ELECTIONS OF CALVERT COUNTY MAHONEY
v.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ELECTIONS OF BALTIMORE CITY DORSEY
v.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ELECTIONS OF BALTIMORE CITY (Three Appeals in Separate Records)
Court of Appeals of Maryland.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided July 26, 1954.
Opinion filed October 8, 1954.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Clarke Murphy, Jr., and Francis B. Burch, with whom was Philip H. Sachs on the brief, for George P. Mahoney in the Calvert County Case.
Daniel B. Chambers, Jr., Clarke Murphy, Jr., and Francis B. Burch, with whom were Herman Pumpian and Philip H. Sachs on the brief, for George P. Mahoney in the Baltimore City Case.
Gately Flynn and William O.E. Sterling, with whom were Philip H. Dorsey, Jr., pro se, and Dorsey & Sterling on the brief, for Philip H. Dorsey, Jr.
Frank T. Gray for the Board of Supervisors of Elections of Calvert County.
Frank T. Gray and William C. Walsh for Harry Clifton Byrd, the opposing candidate for the Democratic nomination for Governor of Maryland, in the Calvert County Case.
J. Edgar Harvey, Deputy Attorney General, and James H. Norris, Jr., Special Assistant Attorney General, with whom was Edward D.E. Rollins, Attorney General, on the brief, for the Board of Supervisors of Elections of Baltimore City in the Case appealed by George P. Mahoney.
J. Edgar Harvey, Deputy Attorney General, with whom were Edward D.E. Rollins, Attorney General, and James H. Norris, Jr., Special Assistant Attorney General, on the brief, for the Board of Supervisors of Elections of Baltimore City in the Case appealed by Philip H. Dorsey, Jr.
Court of Appeals of Maryland.
Decided, per curiam, July 26, 1954.
HAMMOND, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.
At the primary election held June 28, 1954, George P. Mahoney sought the right to become the Democratic nominee for the office of Governor of Maryland, and Philip H. Dorsey, Jr. was a candidate of the same party for Attorney General. On the face of the returns, both were unsuccessful. Seeking to change the results, under the procedure established by Art. 33, Sec. 65, of the...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
