Americans for Safe Access v. County of Alameda
Filed 4/28/06 Americans for Safe Access v. County of Alameda CA1/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
| AMERICANS FOR SAFE ACCESS et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. COUNTY OF ALAMEDA et al., Defendants and Respondents. | A111594 (Alameda County Super. Ct. No. RG04-192053) |
Plaintiffs Americans for Safe Access (ASA) and three Berkeley voters sued defendants County of Alameda and its Registrar of Voters, Bradley Clark, claiming irregularities in the recount of votes on a Berkeley ballot measure. Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of dismissal entered after the trial court sustained defendants' demurrer to their first amended complaint without leave to amend. In that pleading, plaintiffs alleged that under Elections Code section 15630, Clark had a duty to grant their request to examine certain information relevant to the operation of Alameda County's electronic voting machines. Plaintiffs contend that the trial court erred by sustaining the demurrer. We agree on the narrow ground that the first amended complaint set forth sufficient allegations to advance this case to an evidentiary hearing. Accordingly, we reverse and remand.
I. FACTS
A. Introduction and Standard of Review
This case involves electronic voting machines, but is not a referendum on the validity of electronic voting. And we do not sit as a legislative or executive body passing judgment on the casting of electronic ballots. Neither is this case Bush v. Gore.[1] Rather, we decide the legal issues raised in this appeal narrowly on the facts that are properly before us, using long-accepted standards of judicial review.
â€
