Legal Opinion
Walters v. Weed
California Supreme Court
Decided April 28, 1988No. S.F. 25130PublishedCited by 63 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*4Opinion
PANELLI, J.
This case presents the question whether voters who leave their domiciles with no intention of returning to live there lose their right to vote in their former domiciles even though they have not yet established new domiciles. In light of the principle that everyone must have a domicile somewhere, we conclude that such individuals retain their right to vote in the precincts of their former domiciles.1
Facts
On November 8, 1983, Jane Weed and three other candidates were elected to the Santa Cruz City Council. Ms. Weed received the fewest number of votes of the four declared…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- California Teachers Ass'n v. San Diego Community College DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1981
- Friends of Mammoth v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- In Re Marriage of BouquetCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Associated Home Builders of Greater Eastbay, Inc. v. City of LivermoreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Mitchell v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by63 opinions
- Union Bank v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- Mt. Hawley Insurance v. LopezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- Bullock v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
- People v. AcostaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
- People v. OganesyanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
58 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.