Stuart v. Board of Supervisors of Elections

295 A.2d 223 (1972)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Stuart v. Board of Supervisors of Elections

Maryland Court of Appeals
295 A.2d 223 (1972)

Play video

Facts

Mary Emily Stuart (plaintiff) and Samuel Austell Jr. were married in Virginia and subsequently moved to Maryland. Pursuant to an antenuptial agreement that the parties signed, Stuart did not take Austell’s surname but rather continued to use her maiden name after the marriage. When Stuart registered to vote in Howard County, Maryland, Stuart disclosed that she consistently used her maiden name in all respects. Stuart’s subsequently issued voter registration identified Stuart by her maiden name. Several days later, however, the Board of Supervisors of Elections for Howard County (the Board) (defendant) notified Stuart that she was required to complete a request form to change her name under Maryland law, which provided that a woman’s legal surname became that of her husband’s upon marriage. Stuart did not complete the form, and her registration was cancelled. Stuart filed suit against the Board, alleging that she was lawfully permitted under Maryland law to register to vote using her maiden name. At an evidentiary hearing, Stuart testified that she routinely used her given name in all facets of her life. The Board provided some evidence that the practice of requiring the use of a husband’s surname was intended in part to prevent a woman from voting under her maiden name and under her husband’s surname. The trial court held for the Board. Stuart appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Murphy, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 744,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 744,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 987 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 744,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 987 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership