<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: California Write-in Case Goes to State Court of Appeals</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ballot-access.org/2006/08/23/california-write-in-case-goes-to-state-court-of-appeals/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ballot-access.org/2006/08/23/california-write-in-case-goes-to-state-court-of-appeals/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 05:30:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=5532</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Kadlecek</title>
		<link>http://www.ballot-access.org/2006/08/23/california-write-in-case-goes-to-state-court-of-appeals/comment-page-1/#comment-13525</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Kadlecek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2006 20:12:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ballot-access.org/2006/08/23/california-write-in-case-goes-to-state-court-of-appeals/#comment-13525</guid>
		<description>According to the State Court of Appeals website, the petition was summarily dismissed by Presiding Judge Scotland on August 23rd.

Unless there are further appeals planned soon, I suppose that means that the five candidates (the Republican who filed the case, the three Democrats who attempted to intervene, and one Peace and Freedom candidate) who would have won nomination if the decision were overturned will not appear on the November 2006 ballot, but with no published opinion no binding precedent has been set.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>According to the State Court of Appeals website, the petition was summarily dismissed by Presiding Judge Scotland on August 23rd.</p>
<p>Unless there are further appeals planned soon, I suppose that means that the five candidates (the Republican who filed the case, the three Democrats who attempted to intervene, and one Peace and Freedom candidate) who would have won nomination if the decision were overturned will not appear on the November 2006 ballot, but with no published opinion no binding precedent has been set.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

