Court to Hear Suit on Friedman’s Eligibility in 43rd District Race

Sacramento Superior Court today will hear a suit that seeks to eject the widely acknowledged front-runner from the 43rd Assembly District Democratic primary.

Rosemary Woodlock filed the suit in Sacramento on Monday, citing a state statute that defines candidates’ eligibility requirements.

The suit alleges that Terry B. Friedman, widely considered the favorite to win the Democratic nomination June 3, is not a legitimate contender because he did not meet state residency requirements at the time he obtained candidacy papers.

In seeking to keep Friedman off the primary ballot, the suit cites the following section of the state’s Election Code:

“Unless otherwise specifically provided, no person is eligible to be elected . . . to an elective office unless that person is a registered voter and otherwise qualified to vote for that office at the time that nomination papers are issued to the person.”

Question of Residency

The secretary of state’s office says a candidate must be a resident of a district for 30 days before running for an office in that district. Friedman said last week that he moved into the district on Feb. 8. He had lived there for 28 days when he obtained his candidacy papers.

When the issue arose last week, Oliver Cox, an attorney with the secretary of state’s office, said that what is important is when the candidacy papers are returned by a candidate, not when they are taken out.

Friedman apparently returned his papers on March 12, which, under Cox’s interpretation, would make him a bona fide candidate.

Cox said last week that Friedman’s papers had been examined and appeared to meet Election Code requirements.

When Woodlock last week questioned Friedman’s residency status, Friedman said the residency matter should not be an issue, especially since the secretary of state’s office had said his candidacy was legitimate. He said Woodlock raised the issue to try to have him disqualified because he was favored to win.

“I have full confidence that I fully meet the residency requirements. I have no doubt that a court will so rule,” Friedman said Tuesday.

Historically, courts in California have rejected most challenges to a candidate’s residency status, at times even ignoring parts of the Election Code considered too restrictive.

Should the court side with Woodlock, a Woodland Hills attorney, it would deal a blow to the potent political organization headed by Reps. Howard Berman (D-Panorama City) and Henry Waxman (D-Los Angeles). It would also throw the race for the key seat from the Westside and West San Fernando Valley into confusion.

The Waxman-Berman organization let it be known before the close of the filing period that Friedman, a Westside legal aide attorney, was their choice to succeed Assemblyman Gray Davis (D-Los Angeles), who is running for state controller.

Congressmen Criticized

Critics of the congressmen have said the organization’s early endorsement of Friedman had discouraged some others from getting into the race. Winning the Democratic nomination in the 43rd District is considered tantamount to winning the election.

Besides Friedman and Woodlock, Bruce Margolin, a West Hollywood attorney, is seeking the Democratic nomination. Three Republicans are vying for the GOP nomination. There is also a Peace and Freedom Party candidate on the ballot.