Legal Opinion · Dissent

McKesson v. Donaghue

California Supreme Court

Decided March 23, 1944No. S. F. No. 17011Published

1DissentSchauer, J.

I dissent. I am unable to find in the statutes in question any invalidity or any ambiguity or any eon*830flict upon which to predicate an “interpretation” or “reconciliation” which inexorably has the effect of striking down a law which for a number of years has been salutary in its government of all candidacies for judicial office. This law was enacted as a legislative contribution toward building up the standards of the judiciary in this state. In providing for separate judicial offices, in requiring that all judicial candidacies be declared for specifically designated offices and that each…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. People Ex Rel. Happell v. SischoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Roystone Co. v. DarlingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Griffin v. DingleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Baertschiger v. LefflerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
  5. Sinclair v. JordanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920

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

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

Powered by the Exa API