OCR Text |
Show Supreme Court Rules "No" In Harrison Appeal Roosevelt's controversial 1947 municipal election again made news this week when the Utah Supreme Court, in a decision rendered September 15, decided unanimously that in the recount case of Lynn Johnstun, plaintiff, vs J. H, Harrison, defendant, the judgment of the district court, handed down January 23 at Duchesne, Du-chesne, should be affirmed declaring de-claring Lynn Johnstun the duly elected 2-year councilman of the City of Roosevelt. A review of the contested ballot bal-lot shows up this way: On November No-vember 4 in the Roosevelt municipal mu-nicipal election J. II. Harrison, candidate on the Progressive Party ticket for 2-year councilman, council-man, nosed out Lynn Johnstun, Peoples' Party candidate, by a margin of 207 to 205 votes. On November 24 the Roosevelt city council met as a board of canvassers to justify the results of the election; and as such board determined that the 2-vote margin mar-gin separating Harrison and Johnstun constituted sufficient grounds for a recount. Accordingly Accord-ingly an order setting lime for hearing was issued naming Lynn Johnstun as plaintiff and J. H. Harrison as defendant. Subsequently, a ballot recount ordered by Judge Wm. Stanley Dunford of the 4th judicial district dis-trict court, disclosed that the results of Roosevelt's November municipal election were in error insofar as Johnstun and Harrison Harri-son were concerned and that Johnstun had won the post of 2-year councilman ironically by a 2-vote margin. An attempt by Knox Patterson, Patter-son, Salt Lake City attorney who defended Harrison, to maintain the status quo of Harrison, who had served as a member of the city council since Januarv 5, was overruled by Judge Dunford three and a half weeks after the decision handed down at Duchesne Du-chesne when he declared vacant, February 18, the 2-year councilman council-man post held by J. H. Harrison, and named Lynn Johnstun to the post. Johnstun was subsequently sworn in and Harrison appealed the case to the Supreme Court, which has now ruled in favor of the decision of the district court. |