In Denny v. Arntz, published October 14, 2020, the First District Court of Appeal, Division 2 affirmed the dismissal based on demurrer of a lawsuit challenging a city proposition. The proposition was summarized in a voter pamphlet. Pre-election, public meetings were held to discuss the digest language on the proposition that would go into the pamphlet. The pamphlet also included the full text of the proposition. The proposition passed, with 82.7 percent of the votes cast in favor. Five months after the election, the plaintiff sued the city director of elections and city attorney to set aside the proposition under Elections Code sectoin 16100. He contended that the digest materials were not fair and impartial. The trial court sustained the defendants' demurrer without leave to amend.
The appellate court held that the plaintiff failed to state a cause of action under Elections Code section 16100. A court has a duty to uphold an election if possible, and the election must be upheld unless plainly illegal. A court's authority to invalidate an election is limited to the grounds of section 16100. Section 16100 does not set forth grounds to challenge a ballot measure based on alleged deficiencies in the impartial analysis of a ballot measure. Enforcing the requirements for an impartial analysis of a ballot is a preelection activity, using the preelection remedies for doing so. The appellate court further rejected the contention that the procedures of the Election Code superseded the Code of Civil Procedure's application, precluding a demurrer. That would apply only if a cause of action was available under section 16100.
Comments