Phillips v. Curtis
Idaho Supreme Court
ORIGINAL proceeding in Supreme Court by writ of mandate.. Plaintiff was duly nominated by certificate signed by one hundred and fifty electors. The nomination was for “a district office or subdivision of the state, including two counties.” The number of signatures required by section 28 of the election law is in proportion to the number of electors required to elect.
Read the full summary
ORIGINAL proceeding in Supreme Court by writ of mandate.. Plaintiff was duly nominated by certificate signed by one hundred and fifty electors. The nomination was for “a district office or subdivision of the state, including two counties.” The number of signatures required by section 28 of the election law is in proportion to the number of electors required to elect. When the office is to be filled by the electors of the entire state, three hundred signatures are required; for a district office or a subdivision of' the state, including two. or more counties, one hundred and fifty signatures…
1Opinion of the Court
HUSTON, O. J.
The plaintiff applies for a writ of mandate to he issued to the Secretary of State, directing him to place the name of petitioner upon the ticket of the People’s party, as a candidate for the office of senator for the twelfth "senatorial district of this state. The facts, as they appear ■from the record, are substantially as follows: The petitioner, 'Isaac Phillips, was regularly nominated by the state convention of the Democratic party as a candidate for the office of state senator from the twelfth senatorial district, consisting of the counties of Owyhee and Cassia, and his…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Katz v. FitzgeraldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- State ex rel. Woody v. RotwittMontana Supreme Court · 1896
- Robinson v. BodilyIdaho Supreme Court · 1975
- State ex rel. Spring-Meyer v. BrodiganNevada Supreme Court · 1912
- Napton v. MeekIdaho Supreme Court · 1902
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.