Los Angeles herald., 1909-11-23
MUSHET LOSES
RECOUNT SUIT
CITATION FOR G. A. SMITH TO
APPEAR is DISMISSED
CONTEST THROWN OUT OF COURT
ON TECHNICAL GROUNDS
Campaign Committee Workers for the
Defeated Candidate Meet, but
Take No Conclusive
Action
tcOntiDued from Page one,

fContiDued from rage One1
of Fickert VS.. Heney at San Fran
cisco. The state primary election
law itself provides for such con-
test. 1t further provides that this
act shall not apply to the nomina-
ton of officers of municipalities
whose charters provide a system for
nominating candidates for such Of
fees. Statutes of 1909, page 691.
No Remedy in Statutes
AS the city of Los Angeles comes
within the exception, we must hold
that there is nothing in the gem
eral statutes of the state which
would authorize the holding of this
election contest, unless we can find
that those laws are made ap-
plicable by the terms of the city
charter.
/ assume, and do not doubt, that
the city charter could provide for a
primary election contest, by merely
saying that such contests may be
held in the manner provided for in
the code of civil procedure, or by
making some special provision
therefor. So that 1t only remains
to look into the charter and see
whether it has any provisions re-
lating to, or in any way including,
primary election contests.
Section 202 of the city charter, whicl
was referred to by Judge Conrey, j
as follows:
All elections shall except as here
in otherwise provided, be conducted
and held in accordance with the
provisions of the laws of the state
for the holding Of general elections
in effect at the time.
Regarding this Judge Conrey said:
In,
the plaintiff depends upon section
202 as being that part of the char
ter which, as he claims, makes the
election contest laws OF the state
apply to primary nominating cleo
tions of the city of Los Angeles.
If this claim cannot be maintained,
then the court has no right to re-
quire the defendant to respond to
any "citation" in this proceeding.
Supreme Court Decision
The only decision of our supreme
court which has been cited for the
plaintiff as closely related to this
question is Kirk VS.. Rhoads, 46 Cal.
39S.
In that case the "Act to incor-
porate the city of Sacramento" con-
tanned provisions which, it was
held, permitted the county court to
hear and determine an election
contest. The said act provided that
"all the provisions of law in force
regulating elections so far as ap-
plicable, should apply to elections
of officers of that city" The su-
preme court ruled that the sections
of the code of civil procedure, re-
lating to contests of elections, were
a part of the state laws regulating
elections.
We have here to consider whether
that ruling applies to this case.
Here the reference to the state law
(as such reference is contained i'm
section 2O2 of the charter of Los
Angeles) is by its own terms linn
tied to the proposition that these
elections shall be conducted and
held in accordance with the state
laws for the holding of general
elections.
1t seems clear enough that the
election contest sections of the code
are "a part of the general system
for the regulation of elections"
But ii does not necessarily follow
that the judicial proceedings there
in provided for are a part of the
holding of the elections, as those
words are commonly used and un-
derstood, and as the words We're
used in sections 1914, POP and 206b
of the charter of the city of Los
Angeles.
1t may be that, i'm certain sense,
the work of conducting an election
is not complete until the person
elected has acquired complete title
and all of the evidences of title to
his office. And there is some rea-
son in the suggestion that, accord
ing to the broadest meaning of the
words, the work of any special
tribunal appointed to recount bal
lots cast at an election is work in
cluded in the conduct of the cleo
tion.
Agrees with Plaintiff
/ find myself inClinel to agree
with plaintiffs counsel in this gem
eral proposition.