Dawson

Dawson v. Superior Court

Good Law
13 Cal. App. 582·1910 Cal. App. LEXIS 143·110 P. 479
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 13, 1910Civ. No. 854.California308 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

This application as presented is based upon the theory, first, that cities organized under the municipal corporations act are not subordinate to general law with reference to municipal affairs; and, second, that the general municipal corporations act, which by its terms confers jurisdiction upon the city councils of the respective cities organized thereunder to hear and determine election contests, is the exclusive jurisdiction in that regard. With neither of-these provisions do we agree.

Our supreme court in Ex parte Helm, 143 Cal. 556 , [ 77 Pac. 453 ], has construed section 6 of article XI of the constitution of this state, as amended in 1896, to the effect that but two classes of municipal corporations are relieved from the control of general law in municipal affairs, these being those cities organized by special legislative charter prior to the adoption of the constitution of 1879, and cities operating under what is denominated a freeholders’ charter; that other cities organized and operated under the municipal corporations act are subject and subordinate to general laws even in municipal affairs.

As to the jurisdiction of the common council to hear and determine election…

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.