Los Angeles herald., 1907-04-27
DEMURRER FILED
IN RECOUNT CASE
ATTORNEYS FOR EARLEY AND
WINNER BUSY
to Open Case by Attorneys for
aterhouss--Root Side of
Pasadena Litigation
Pasadena Agency,
a North Raymond Avenue,
Phones Sunset 1907, Home 2124.


PASADENA, April 26.-A demurrer
was filed this afternoon in the election
contest case by the attorneys for the
defendants, Mayor-elect Thomas Farley
and Councilman-elec Winner. The de-
murrer is a general denial of the alle-
cations made in the complaint and al
leges that the grounds In the supple
mentary complaint and the original
complaint to change the election one
whit should the grounds outlined In the
complaint and supplemental document
be allowed. The demurrer Is in It's
most salient points as follows:
That said complaint does not state
facts sufficient to constitute cause OF
action against this defendant.
That said complaint does not, nor
does any count, paragraph or cause Of
action therein, separately or severally
stated or alleged, state facts sufficient
to constitute q cause of action against
this defendant
Said complaint is uncertain In thisI
(a) That the matters and things in
said complaint or written statement are
not specifically set forth in manner or
form as required by the provisions of
law and particularly the provisions OF
section Ills of the code of civil pro-
cedure of this state.
(b) That 1t does not sufficiently ap-
pear from said complaint or written
statement, nor can it with sufficient
certainty be ascertained or determined
therefrom. that If the number OF al
legged illegal votes alleged to have
been given to the defendant were taken
| from him, 1t would reduce the NUM-
ber of his legal votes below the num-
ber of votes alleged to have been given
to the plaintiff for the same office,
after deducting therefrom the alleged
illegal votes which are shown or may
| be shown to have been given TO some
other person or candidate.
(c) That it does not appear with
| sufficient certainty from said COM
plant, nor can 1t be ascertained there
| from, upon what ground or for What
reason the board of judges in the mu-
nicipal election precincts of the city OF
Pasadena rejected or failed to count,
| tally or return the votes which 1t was
alleged in said complaint said judges
| did reject or fail to count or tally, and
particularly those stated and alleged
| in paragraph XI of said complaint.
The facts based upon which said al
| legged votes were rejected or not count
ed or tailed are not set forth in said
paragraph XI, or elsewhere In said
| complaint so as to enable the court
| to determine, or the defendant to know
| or be informed of the fact as to wheth-
er or not the. alleged acts of said
| board of judges was wrongful or un-
! lawful, and said allegations are but
| conclusions of law and not state
ment of facts. Nor does 1t appear
from said complaint or from said al
| legations In paragraph XII thereof, or
| elsewhere or at all in said complaint,
as to whether or not enough unlawful
or regular votes cast at said election
were rejected or not counted to change
or alter the result; nor does 1t appear
in said complaint with sufficient cer-
tainty as to how many votes at said
election were rejected or failed to be
counted or not tailed or returned; nor
does it appear with sufficient certain
ty in said complaint as to whether or
not the said board of judges did not
act within the scope of their duties;
nor does it especially appear that the
alleged action of said board of judges
was wrongful or unlawful.
Cd 1t does not appear with suffi-
Client certainty in said complaint that
the 500 ballots mentioned and referred
to in paragraph XIII of said complaint
were improperly or illegally voted, or
improperly or illegally, or wrongfully
or unlawfully counted, tailed or re-
turned for the defendant. 1t does not
appear with sufficient certainty that
said 500 ballots were wrongfully or un-
lawfully counted, tailed or returned.
% lar dS appears NY INC aHeSdlloliS
in said complaint contained, the facts
stated in paragraph XIII thereof were
lawful and not unlawful or wrongful
in any manner whatsoever.
(e) Said complaint is further uncer-
tain in that it does not appear there
from, nor can it be therefrom ascer-
tanned or determined. how or in what
manner the plaintiff was aggrieved
or injured by any of the matters or
things or acts referred to or stated
in said complaint.
Said complaint is ambiguous on the
ground and for the reasons stated in
in paragraph III of this demurrer.
Said complaint is unintelligible on
the ground and for the reasons stated
paragraph III ~ this demurrer.
HAHN & HAHN,
SEWARD A. SIMONS,
WORKS, LEE & WORKS,