Rutledge

Rutledge v. Crawford

Good Law
1891 Cal. LEXIS 1123·91 Cal. 526·27 P. 779
Supreme Court of CaliforniaOctober 8, 1891No. 14854California2,058 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Haven, J.

The parties to this action wrere oppósing candidates for the office of judge of the superior court of Sonoma County, at the general election of 1890. The respondent, Crawford, received a certificate of election, and this is an action contesting his right thereto.

As a result of the trial and recount in the superior court, it appearing that the defendant received one vote more than the plaintiff, the court, on motion of defendant, granted a nonsuit, and dismissed the proceedings.

The plaintiff appeals from this judgment, and claims that the court erred in counting certain ballots for the *530 respondent, and in refusing to count others for himself.

1. Two ballots, regular on their face, and with the appellant’s name printed thereon for judge of the superior court, were not counted by the court, for the reason that there was on the back of each a faint type impression of a portion of the face of a similar ticket. The impression is known among printers as an “offset,” and is produced when there is too much ink upon the type used in printing, by placing one ticket face downward upon the back of another which has preceded it from the press. In our opinion, the court erred in its…

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.