Hmmm. I'm not an election lawyer [[although I am a lawyer) and this decision seems contrary to the intent of the residency requirement in my opinion. Basically if Duggan had sat on his signatures for 14 days and THEN turned them in, then according to this ruling, his candidacy would be perfectly valid. But since he was proactive and turned them in two weeks earlier, he's off the ballot. I cannot think of a single policy reason that would support such an interpretation of the residency requirement. His "filing for office" could be [[and should be) regarded as continuing up to the date of the deadline for filing, and that deadline didn't occur until after he hit the 1-year residency mark and after he turned in his paperwork. This ruling should be overturned.