Legal Opinion

Bowring v. Dominguez

California Supreme Court

Decided April 16, 1935No. S. F. 15413PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCurtis, J.

Proceedings in mandate against the City Council and City Clerk of the City of Los Angeles. The practical effect of granting the petition would be to declare that the petitioner was nominated at the recent primary election as a candidate for the office of municipal judge of said city, being office No. 10, instead of the respondent, Delamere Frances McCloskey. Said respondent and petitioner, together with Joseph Marchetti and four others, were can*168didates for said office No. 10, with the result that Joseph Marchetti received the highest number of votes cast for said office, said Delamere Francis…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Searcy v. GrowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  2. Sheehan v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
  3. Ward v. CrowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Walther v. RaboltCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Evans v. State Election BoardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1990
  2. Chambers v. TerryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
  3. Samuels v. HiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Brown v. HiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1966
  5. Davies v. WilsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1940

4 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