Vincent v. Mott
California Supreme Court
Vincent v. Mott, 163 Cal. 342 (Cal. 1912)
Vincent v. Mott
Opinion of the Court
It does not appear from the petition presented that the Oakland council has been asked to appoint on the election boards to hold the recall election persons of whom half belong to the Republican party and half to the Democratic party, as required in section 1142 of the Political Code. We think that under the provisions of the charter that section applies to recall elections held under said charter. But because of the failure to aver that the council threatens to disobey that section, the application for mandamus is denied.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- ROBERT VINCENT v. FRANK H. MOTT, Mayor and Commissioners and City Council and Ex-Officio Board of Election Commissioners of the City of Oakland, etc.
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Election—Charter of City of Oakland—Recall Election—Officers of Election Boards.—Under the provisions of the charter of the city of Oakland, section 1142 of the Political Code, determining the qualifications and method of appointment of the officers of election boards, applies to recall elections held under such charter. Id.—Apportionment of Officers Between Different Political Parties—Mandamus to Compel.—A writ of mandate will not lie to compel the city council of such city to apportion the officers of the election boards at a recall election among persons belonging to different political parties, as required by that section, in the absence of an averment that the council threatens to disobey the section in that particular.