Reites v. Wilkerson

THE COURT.—

Petitioners herein made a motion in this court that respondent Walter C. Peterson, City Clerk of the City of Los Angeles, appear and show cause why he Should not be cited for contempt of this court for allegedly failing and refusing to comply with the terms of a peremptory writ of mandate issued out of this court on the 25th day of January, 1950 (95 A.C.A. No. 7, p. 4 of minutes).

This proceeding concerns the examination and certification by respondent city clerk of certain petitions filed with him for the recall of Honorable Fletcher Bowron as Mayor of the City of Los Angeles.

Insofar as here pertinent the facts are that on January 5, 1950, the original petitions for such recall election were filed with respondent city clerk. On August 22,1950, in conformity with the provisions of the Los Angeles City Charter as interpreted by this court in the foregoing writ of mandate, respondent city clerk duly certified to the council of said city that said petitions did not contain sufficient names to require the holding of an election for the recall of Mayor Bowron.

Section 273 of the Los Angeles City Charter provides in part

[502]

that when such a recall petition is found to he insufficient and so certified to the council, “it may be amended by filing a supplemental petition or petitions, in form, a duplicate of original petition bearing additional signatures, within ten days from the date of such certificate ...”

Within the 10 days after said certification of insufficiency, and as provided in the foregoing charter provision, to wit, on August 30, 1950, there was filed with respondent city clerk a supplemental petition consisting of 1,236 sections and containing 73,649 names of claimed registered voters of the city of Los Angeles. Some 3,979 of such names had been signed to said petition prior to January 5, 1950, the date when the first original recall petition was filed. The remainder of said names were signed subsequent to January 5, 1950, but only 915 names were affixed to said petition within 10 days subsequent to August 22, 1950, or in other words, within 10 days after the foregoing certificate of insufficiency was filed with the council by respondent city clerk.

Acting upon the advice of the City Attorney of Los Angeles, respondent city clerk refused to examine any of the names on such supplemental petition other than the 915 names affixed thereto within 10 days after August 22, 1950.