Court Opinion

ID: 9864678
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-25 14:53:48.618037+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:23:38.843756
License: Public Domain

THE COURT
In their petition for a rehearing appellants state that the opinion filed herein does not dispose of their contention that the findings are insufficient to support the judgment.
The findings were considered in Covell v. Lee, 69 Cal. App. 1 [230 Pac. 208], and what is there said need not be repeated here. The finding there set out is necessarily decisive against the appellants and is sufficient to support the judgment.  Since the petition did not contain the signatures of a majority of the registered electors of Plainfield district it was immaterial whether it was signed by a majority of the electors of other districts. (Phillips v. Stark, 65 Cal. App. 136 [223 Pac. 443].) The finding is not outside the issues, but it is responsive to the only issue raised by the pleadings.
The petition is denied.
A petition by appellants to have the cause heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on April 16, 1925.
All the Justices concurred.