Legal Opinion

Hartman v. Kenyon

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 30, 1991No. H006600PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

COTTLE, J.

Recall proponent Steve Hartman sought a writ of mandate to compel Patricia Kenyon, City Clerk of the City of Santa Cruz (hereafter Clerk), to certify that three recall petitions he submitted contained the requisite number of signatures of eligible registered voters. When Hartman filed his petitions with the Clerk for examination, each contained more than the number of signatures required. However, after the Clerk completed her examination of the petitions, she determined that they were short of the required number by approximately 50 signatures. Because the Clerk had rejected…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Clean Air Constituency v. California State Air Resources BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
  2. Otsuka v. HiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
  3. Walters v. WeedCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  4. Jolicoeur v. MihalyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  5. Moore v. City CouncilCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Carson Citizens for Reform v. KawagoeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  2. Mapstead v. AnchundoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  3. Clark v. McCannCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API