DeMiglio

DeMiglio v. Mashore

Good Law
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 373·4 Cal. App. 4th 1260·6 Cal. Rptr. 2d 267·92 Daily Journal DAR 4102·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2595
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 25, 1992A052035California4,017 words

Opinion

Opinion

Anderson, J.

This is the second appeal in the election contest brought by Concord electors Danny T. DeMiglio and Mary Bacon (hereafter contestants) upon allegations that appellant Lloyd Mashore was not domiciled in Concord at the relevant times and, thus, was ineligible for the office of councilperson.

The Concord electors elected Mashore to their city council on November 7, 1989. Contestants filed a timely election challenge and succeeded in obtaining a judgment annulling his election. The sole issue at trial was whether Mashore had the requisite intent, as defined by statute, to establish his domicile in Concord. We concluded the trial court made reversible legal errors and issued contradictory findings and, accordingly, reversed and remanded. The trial court prepared additional findings which, read in conjunction with the original findings and judgment, again resulted in a judgment of annulment. This appeal followed wherein Mashore again challenges the validity of the findings and also raises a jurisdictional issue. We find reversible error and conclude the evidence does not support the judgment. We direct the entry of judgment upholding the election of Mashore to the Concord City…

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.