Legal Opinion
Dornan v. Sanchez
District Court, C.D. California
Decided September 23, 1997No. SA CV 97-176-GLT[CC]PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
TAYLOR, District Judge.
The court holds, among other things, the deposition subpoena provisions of the Federal Contested Elections Act, 2 U.S.C. § 381 and following, are constitutional.
I. BACKGROUND
By less than a thousand votes, incumbent Robert Dornan was defeated by challenger Loretta Sanchez in the 1996 general election for the 46th Congressional District seat in the United States House of Representatives. Dornan filed an election contest in the House of Representatives under the Federal Contested Elections Act (referred to as “FCEA” or “the Act”) 2 U.S.C. § 381 and following. That…
2Cases cited42 opinions
- Baker v. CarrSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- United States v. SalernoSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. Alabama Ex Rel. PattersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Mary Lankford, in her official capacity as Sublette County Clerk v. Paul Rock, Dari Quirk, & Ernest KawaWyoming Supreme Court · 2013
- Recording Industry Ass'n of America v. Verizon Internet ServicesDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2003
- Kalman v. Berlyn Corp.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1989
- Cooley v. KeislingDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1999