Craig v. Brown

California Supreme Court
Craig v. Brown, 114 Cal. 480 (Cal. 1896)
46 P. 870; 1896 Cal. LEXIS 928
Beatty, McFarland

Craig v. Brown

Opinion of the Court

The Court.

We are of opinion that the application for a writ of mandate should be denied, holding that the designation “ National Democratic is not calculated to deceive. Henshaw, J., Van Fleet, J.,

Harrison, J., Temple, J.

Dissenting Opinion

Beatty, C. J., dissenting.

I dissent. I cannot distinguish this case from the Dolan and Ewing cases, in which we held that candidates nominated by petition are not entitled to a party designation which might mislead voters.

Concurring Opinion

McFarland, J., concurring.

I concur in the judgment ; but I also think that the question—under the peculiar form which this petition for a writ takes—was determined by the secretary of state when he accepted and filed the certificate, and that his action cannot be reviewed on this proceeding.

Garoutte, J., dissented.

Reference

Full Case Name
WILLIAM CRAIG v. L. H. BROWN, Secretary of State
Cited By
4 cases
Status
Published