# Johnson v. Hamilton

> California Supreme Court · October 27, 1975 · 15 Cal. 3d 461

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9543227

## Case

- **Full name:** WAYNE CLARKE JOHNSON Et Al., Petitioners, v. ELAINE HAMILTON, as City Clerk, Etc., Respondent
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** October 27, 1975
- **Citations:** 15 Cal. 3d 461; 125 Cal. Rptr. 129; 541 P.2d 881; 1975 Cal. LEXIS 244
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Mosk
- **Judges:** Richardson, Clark, Mosk, Okrand, Petitioners
- **Cited by:** 49 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9543227

## Opinion text

MOSK, J.
I concur.
Nevertheless, I still adhere to the belief that the preferable test is to determine whether the elected candidate meets residence requirements at the time of assumption of office. (See my concurring opinion in Thompson v. Mellon (1973) 9 Cal.3d 96, 109 [ 107 Cal.Rptr. 20 , 507 P.2d 628 , 65 A.L.R.3d 1029 ].) Í would also base our conclusion on article I, section 7, subdivision (b), of the California Constitution.
However, recognizing that in this field as in so many others, perfection eludes definition as well as attainment, I am willing to join the majority in its conclusion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9543227. Public record. Not legal advice.