On the matter of whether or not Ward Nelson was supposed to be voting on a matter in which he was also a nominee. I humbly present a 100 year old case law.
Smith v Centralia. November 1909.
The case concerned vacating a street, which would appear to have little to do with filling a vacant council seat.
Except one of the persons who owned property abutting the street vacation was... a council member. And that council member voted on the matter.
The last paragraph of the case speaks directly to what is going on with Ward Nelson's participation in the roll call vote...
"The ordinance is invalid for another reason. A councilman who cast the deciding vote was one of the petitioners for the ordinance, and one of the persons who would profit by its enactment. He was, therefore, in effect adjudicating his own cause, in violation of a maxim as old as the law itself. The judgment is affirmed."
Can any legal experts comment on whether or not this might qualify as precedent to render Ward Nelson's appointment or vote invalid?
No comments:
Post a Comment