In re Stuart

Good Law
53 Cal. 745
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 1, 1879No. 6840California1,323 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

This cause was submitted to the Court below for judgment upon certain facts stipulated between the parties, and which are as follows:

“ 1. Thomas H. Reynolds is the legally elected, qualified, and acting County Clerk of the City and County of San Francisco; and he entered in possession of said office of County Clerk of the City and County of San Francisco on the first Monday of December, A. r>. 1877, and for the term of two years from and after said date, the said term being defined and designated by a law of the State of California.

“ 2. William A. Stuart was legally elected at the general election held on Wednesday, the 3rd day of September, a. d. 1879, to the office of County Clerk of the City and County of San Francisco, has qualified and received the certificate of election, and is in law and in fact the successor in office to said Thomas H. Reynolds, and entitled to the possession of the office of County Clerk of the City and County of San Francisco, upon the expiration of the term of office of said Thomas H. Reynolds.

“3. On this 1st day of December, A. D. 1879, said William A. Stuart demanded of said Thomas H. Reynolds the possession of the office of County Clerk of the…

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.