Hartman

Hartman v. Kenyon

Good Law
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 81·227 Cal. App. 3d 413·277 Cal. Rptr. 765·91 Daily Journal DAR 1442·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 905
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 30, 1991H006600California3,808 words

Opinion

Opinion

Cottle, J.

Recall proponent Steve Hartman sought a writ of mandate to compel Patricia Kenyon, City Clerk of the City of Santa Cruz (hereafter Clerk), to certify that three recall petitions he submitted contained the requisite number of signatures of eligible registered voters. When Hartman filed his petitions with the Clerk for examination, each contained more than the number of signatures required. However, after the Clerk completed her examination of the petitions, she determined that they were short of the required number by approximately 50 signatures. Because the Clerk had rejected approximately 120 signatures on each petition for irregularities in circulator declarations, Hartman sought leave of the Clerk to file amended circulator declarations. When the Clerk refused to accept them, Hartman filed a petition for writ of mandate. The trial court denied the petition, finding that the Clerk had no statutory authority to accept amended circulator declarations and that other signatures had been properly rejected. We affirm.

Facts

All relevant dates are in 1989.

On February 13 and 14, Steve Hartman commenced recall proceedings by serving notices of intention to circulate a recall…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.