People ex rel. Hughes v. Gillespie
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the superior court of the city of San Francisco. The decision of this court was based solely upon the ground that the superior court had no jurisdiction in the premises.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the superior court of the city of San Francisco. The decision of this court was based solely upon the ground that the superior court had no jurisdiction in the premises. The section of the act by which the superior court was established, and which defines its jurisdiction, is in the following words :— “ Sec. 4. The said superior court shall have the same original “jurisdiction within the limits of the city of San Francisco, in “ civil cases, as is, or may be, conferred by law upon the district court.” The superior court held that it had jurisdiction in the present case, and…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Hastings, Ch. J.
The relator states that David Gillespie, in violation of the constitution of the state of California and of the charter of the city of San Francisco, has been elected to, and continues to exercise, the office of alderman *343of said city—that at the time of his election, lie was ineligible to said office by reason of his non-residenco in said state for the term required by law, &c. The superior court seems to have overlooked the first question argued here as to its jurisdiction in cases of proceedings by quo warranto, and proceeded to pass upon the eligibility of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Commonwealth v. M'CloskeySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1830
3Cited by3 opinions
- Vassault v. AustinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
- Seale v. MitchellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1855
- Ex parte StratmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870