In Feb. 25 IssueBy Greg WellsTimes Journal Managing Editor
Special Judge Julia H. Adams said she would deliver her decision on the two motions for summary judgment in the moist-election case this Friday.
The plaintiffs in the case, along with one of the defendants agreed in court that the County Clerk Lisha Popplewell, her clerks and the election board members had done nothing wrong in the conduct of the election and there were no actual disagreements in the facts of the case.
"So we don't need a trial," Adams said, and the attorney for the plaintiffs, A.C. Donahue, and Derrick Helm the attorney for one of the defendants agreed.
The county officials were not represented at court.
Donahue argued in his motion for summary judgment that the vote should never have been allowed in precincts and that the question on the ballot was also worded in a leading fashion.
Helm argued in the motion for summary judgment that the time for any argument over the propriety of holding a moist election in a precinct had passed when an appeal was not filed in the circuit court case which allowed the election.
The arguments over points of law were extended and included the judge questioning the attorneys several times.
In the end she said her decision was likely by the end of the week.
The case is contesting the November special election to decide if restaurants seating more than 100 people could serve alcoholic beverages.
The results certified in that election were that the city as a whole voted against the sale, but both of the precincts which make up and extend beyond the city voted yes.