Legal Opinion

Griffin v. Dingley

California Supreme Court

Decided October 8, 1896No. S. F. No. 706PublishedCited by 19 opinions

Application in the Supreme Court for a writ of mandate to compel the county clerk of Stanislaus County to file a certificate of nomination. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

The Court.

Application for a writ of mandate. ' The respondent is the county clerk of Stanislaus county and, on the fifth day of October, 1896, the petitioner presented to him for filing a certificate, duly authenticated by the proper officers, of the nomination by the county convention of the Democratic party of that county, held September 7, 1896, of. certain candidates for public offices to be filled by the electors of that county at the coming general election. The respondent refused to file the same, alleging, as a reason therefor, that that day was a holiday, and also because the same…

2Cited by19 opinions

  1. Koella v. State Ex Rel. MoffettTennessee Supreme Court · 1966
  2. Seawell v. GiffordIdaho Supreme Court · 1912
  3. State Ex Rel. Earley v. BatchelorWashington Supreme Court · 1942
  4. State ex rel. Anderson v. FalleyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1900
  5. Deleon v. Bay Area Rapid Transit DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983

14 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