Boughton v. Price, No. 7603

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Idaho
Writing for the CourtRobert E. Smylie, Atty. Gen., Boise, Donald A. Purdy; PORTER; HOLDEN
Citation215 P.2d 286,70 Idaho 243
Decision Date23 February 1950
Docket NumberNo. 7603
PartiesBOUGHTON v. PRICE, Secretary of State.

Page 286

215 P.2d 286
70 Idaho 243
BOUGHTON

v.
PRICE, Secretary of State.
No. 7603.
Supreme Court of Idaho.
Feb. 23, 1950.

[70 Idaho 244]

Page 287

W. F. McNaughton and Herbert S. Sanderson, Coeur d'Alene, for plaintiff and petitioner.

[70 Idaho 245] Robert E. Smylie, Atty. Gen., Boise, Donald A. Purdy, J. N. Leggat, and Don J. McClenahan, Asst. Attys. Gen., for defendant.

E. B. Smith and Robert H. Copple, Boise, for Board of Com'rs of Idaho State Bar, as amicus curiae.

[70 Idaho 246] J. F. Martin, Boise, as amicus curiae.

PORTER, Justice.

Plaintiff initiated these original proceedings in this court by filing a petition denominated 'Petition for Declaratory Judgment In Mandamus.' By such petition, plaintiff alleges as follows:

'I. That he is a qualified elector of the State of Idaho and has been such for more than thirty years last past.

'II. That he is learned in the law, to-wit, admitted to practice before the bar of the District Courts and the Supreme Court of this state, and the District Court of the United States for the District of Idaho, the Supreme Court of the United States for the District of Idaho, the Supreme Court of the United States, and the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; That he resides within the Eighth Judicial District of Idaho, to-wit, at Sandpoint, and presently is one of the duly elected, qualified and acting District Judges of said Court.

'III. That petitioner's term of office as such District Judge will terminate on the 1st day of January, 1951, unless he is reelected to said position.

'IV. That petitioner will be more than seventy years of age before the termination of said term and the beginning of the following term on January 1, 1951.

'V. That it is petitioner's desire and intention to file in his own behalf a declaration of candidacy for the office of District Judge of Idaho for election to said position at the primary and general election following in 1950, with appended to said declaration a petition singed by more than one hundred electors of said state residing in said Judicial District, each stating the he intends to support the petitioner as such condidate for the office of District Judge, and stating the petitioner is legally qualified to hold such office. Petitioner further alleges that he can and will file said nominating certificate in full and strict compliance with Sections 34-702 of the Idaho Code in the office of the Secretary of State of the State of Idaho at least 30 days and not more than 60 days prior to the date fixed by law for holding nominating elections for the election of District [70 Idaho 247] Judges in said District for the term beginning January 1, 1951, and will pay a fee of Sixty-Five Dollars to said Secretary of State at the time of filing said declaration of candidacy unless it shall be determined by this proceeding that petitioner is ineligible to file as such candidate and hold said office.

'VI. Petitioner has heretofore informed the defendant, Honorable J. D. Price of petitioner's desire and intention to so file for said office and is advised by the defendant that he believes, and will hold, that on account of petitioner's age, then being above seventy years, he feels obliged to rule that petitioner is ineligible to file as a candidate for the office of District Judge and will refuse to certify twenty days before the nominating election or at any time, any list containing petitioner's name and address as a candidate for such office to any County Auditor in said Eighth Judicial District.

'That defendant believes and holds petitioner disqualified for said office under and pursuant to Section 1-2007, I.C., notwithstanding Section 23 of Article 5 of the Idaho Constitution.

'VII. Petitioner believes and therefore alleges the fact to be that he is eligible to the office of District Judge of the Eighth Judicial District of Idaho, notwithstanding his age and that he has a personal right to be nominated, elected and hold said office

Page 288

under the rights guaranteed to him as a citizen of Idaho pursuant to Section 23 of Article 5 of the Idaho Constitution.

'VIII. Plaintiff alleges that Section 1-2007 of Chapter 20, Title I, Idaho Code as amended by Chapter 130 of the Idaho Session Laws, 1949, and said section only, is unconstitutional, and that by reason of the question of validity arising under said Chapter 20, Title 1, I.C., and the defendant's erroneous interpretation of said statute, plaintiff has a personal interest in having the validity of said Section 1-2007 of Chapter 20, Title 1, I.C., adjudicated.

'IX. Petitioner states that the reason application is made to this court in the first instance is because, as petitioner believes, there is only an issue of law involved in a dispute, personal to petitioner, but in which the public has an interest, which can be expeditiously, finally and completely adjudicated and set at rest only by this court.

'X. This action is brought pursuant to Chapter 12 of Title 10, I.C.

'Wherefore petitioner prays judgment that it be determined:

'(1) Whether petitioner will be eligible to serve as judge of the District Court of the Eighth Judicial District of Idaho for the term commencing January 1, 1951.

'(2) Whether petitioner is eligible as a candidate for said office.

'(3) Whether petitioner is entitled to have his candidacy certified upon full compliance[70 Idaho 248] with sections 34-702 and 34-703, I.C., and the facts of this case, pursuant to Section 34-704, I.C., notwithstanding he will be above seventy years of age.'

Defendant filed a general demurrer to such petition. The matter...

To continue reading

Request your trial
48 practice notes
  • Gerberding v. Munro, No. 65059-4
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • 8 Enero 1998
    ...additional qualifications can be added by statute." Br. of Resp't at 18-19. They cite four cases from the annotations, Boughton v. Price, 70 Idaho 243, 215 P.2d 286 (1950); Darrow v. People, 8 Colo. 417, 8 P. 661 (1885); State v. Johnson, 33 Del. 334, 138 A. 280 (Super.Ct.1927); and State e......
  • Rittenband v. Cory
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • 22 Agosto 1984
    ...Aronstam v. Cashman, supra, 132 Vt. 538, 325 A.2d 361; Nelson v. Miller, supra, 25 Utah 2d 277 [480 P.2d 467]; Boughton v. Price, supra, 70 Idaho 243 [215 P.2d 286].) In the past the California Supreme Court has termed the right to hold public office "fundamental." (Zeilenga v. Nelson (1971......
  • Malmed v. Thornburgh, No. 79-2467
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • 13 Mayo 1980
    ...--- U.S. ----, 100 S.Ct. 219, 62 L.Ed.2d 142 (1979); Rubino v. Ghezzi, 512 F.2d 431 (2d Cir. 1975) (per curiam); Boughton v. Price, 70 Idaho 243, 215 P.2d 286 (1950); O'Neil v. Baine, 568 S.W.2d 761 (Mo.1978); Nelson v. Miller, 25 Utah 2d 277, 480 P.2d 467 (1971); Aronstam v. Cashman, 132 V......
  • State ex rel. Keefe v. Eyrich, No. 85-1680
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Ohio
    • 31 Enero 1986
    ...this requirement since most other states have similarly restricted access to their judicial offices. See, e.g., Boughton v. Price (1950), 70 Idaho 243, 215 P.2d 286; Trafelet v. Thompson (C.A.7, 1979), 594 F.2d 623 [489 N.E.2d 263] (Illinois); O'Neil v. Baine (Mo.1978), 568 S.W.2d 761; Grin......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
49 cases
  • Gerberding v. Munro, No. 65059-4
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • 8 Enero 1998
    ...qualifications can be added by statute." Br. of Resp't at 18-19. They cite four cases from the annotations, Boughton v. Price, 70 Idaho 243, 215 P.2d 286 (1950); Darrow v. People, 8 Colo. 417, 8 P. 661 (1885); State v. Johnson, 33 Del. 334, 138 A. 280 (Super.Ct.1927); and State ex rel.......
  • Rittenband v. Cory
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • 22 Agosto 1984
    ...Aronstam v. Cashman, supra, 132 Vt. 538, 325 A.2d 361; Nelson v. Miller, supra, 25 Utah 2d 277 [480 P.2d 467]; Boughton v. Price, supra, 70 Idaho 243 [215 P.2d 286].) In the past the California Supreme Court has termed the right to hold public office "fundamental." (Zeilenga v. Ne......
  • Malmed v. Thornburgh, No. 79-2467
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • 13 Mayo 1980
    ...--- U.S. ----, 100 S.Ct. 219, 62 L.Ed.2d 142 (1979); Rubino v. Ghezzi, 512 F.2d 431 (2d Cir. 1975) (per curiam); Boughton v. Price, 70 Idaho 243, 215 P.2d 286 (1950); O'Neil v. Baine, 568 S.W.2d 761 (Mo.1978); Nelson v. Miller, 25 Utah 2d 277, 480 P.2d 467 (1971); Aronstam v. Cashman, 132 V......
  • State ex rel. Keefe v. Eyrich, No. 85-1680
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Ohio
    • 31 Enero 1986
    ...this requirement since most other states have similarly restricted access to their judicial offices. See, e.g., Boughton v. Price (1950), 70 Idaho 243, 215 P.2d 286; Trafelet v. Thompson (C.A.7, 1979), 594 F.2d 623 [489 N.E.2d 263] (Illinois); O'Neil v. Baine (Mo.1978), 568 S.W.2d 761; Grin......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT