Misch v. Mayhew
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the County Court, County of Tehama. H. A. Mayhew and C. P. Brainard were candidates for the office of county judge, at the judicial election held in the county of Tehama, on the twentieth day of October, 1875. Mayhew, by the official canvass, was declared elected.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the County Court, County of Tehama. H. A. Mayhew and C. P. Brainard were candidates for the office of county judge, at the judicial election held in the county of Tehama, on the twentieth day of October, 1875. Mayhew, by the official canvass, was declared elected. Misch, an elector in the county, filed a petition contesting his right to the office, on the ground that enough illegal votes had been cast for him, which, if deducted from his vote as declared, would elect Brainard. The defendant, in his answer, also set up that illegal votes were cast for the contestant. The trial…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court:
The judgment of the court below is erroneous. The language of section 1116 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which fixes the time when the list of alleged illegal voters shall be served, is equivalent to a requirement that the opposite party shall have three days’ notice of the illegal votes which the party serving the list expects to prove at the trial. The case is, therefore, covered by section 12 of the same code, and a list served on the seventh of December could properly be relied upon and proven at the trial on the tenth of December.
The judgment is reversed and the cause is…
2Cited by17 opinions
- Bates v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Bank of Lemoore v. FulghamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- In re Difference & Controversy between E. M. Derby & Co. & City of ModestoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Cosgriff v. Bd. of Election Commr's of S.F.California Supreme Court · 1907
- Hannah v. GreenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.