Steele v. Bartlett
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
Mandamus to compel the respondent city clerk to omit certain names from ballot.
The city of Torrance, a city of the sixth class, has noticed a special election for September 10, to fill two vacancies on the city council resulting from the recall of incumbents. Several persons seeking the office have filed nominating papers, which papers, under section 9760 of the Elections Code, must be filed “not later than twelve o’clock noon on the thirty-first day before the election.” Computation reveals that the thirty-first day before September 10 (election day) was Sunday, August 10, the last…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Griffin v. DingleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Hutchins v. County ClerkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
3Cited by9 opinions
- Ursino v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
- Koella v. State Ex Rel. MoffettTennessee Supreme Court · 1966
- Valdez v. Seidner-Miller, Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- Deleon v. Bay Area Rapid Transit DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
- Barnes v. WongCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.