The Resolution of Election Disputes: Legal Principles that Control Election Challenges 736 A.2d 104 816 1022 250A.2d Conn. 241, 736 A.2d 104, 137 Ed. Law Rep. 1019 149 N.H. 105, A.2d 1022 (Cite as: 250 816 Conn. 241, 736 A.2d 104) (Cite as: 149 N.H. 105, 816 A.2d 1022) Supreme Court of Connecticut. Supreme Steven Court ofBORTNER New Hampshire. Appeal of Peter McDONOUGH. v. No.WOODBRIDGE 2002-814. TOWN OF et al. No. 16114. Argued Jan. 29, 2003. Opinion Issued Feb. 2003. Argued June 11,11, 1999. Decided Aug. 17, 1999. Candidate for county office sought review of decision of New Hampshire Ballot LawforCommission Unsuccessful write-in candidate elementary (BLC) certifying his opponent as winner elecboard of education brought action against of town, retion. The of Supreme Nadeau, J., held that:chal(1) gistrars voters, Court, and successful candidates, Supreme Court could jurisdiction lenging election results exercise based on alleged votingover maelection dispute; (2) evidence was not sufficient to chine malfunctions. The Superior Court, Judicial rebut statutory that voters intended District of Newpresumption Haven, Pittman, J., ordered new their straight ticket votes to apply to Supreme skipped races; election. Defendants appealed. The Court, and (3) evidence was (1) not trial sufficient to support a Borden, J., held that: court abused its disconclusion ballottoinstructions were so cretion in that refusing open evidence to confusconsider ing as to interfere with a voter's right, if any, to unelection records offered by defendants, and (2) new derstandable ballot instructions. election was not warranted. Affirmed. Reversed and remanded with direction. McGuire Arnold, JJ., assigned, conBerdon, and J., concurred and specially filed opinion. curred specially and filed opinion. West Headnotes [1] Elections West 8.1 Headnotes [1] Courts 209(2) 144k8.1 Most Cited Cases 106k209(2) Cited Casesis to ensure the true and Purpose of Most election statutes Supreme Courtcount could exercise jurisdiction over most accurate possible of votes for candidates candidate's county election dispute, even though in the election. statute did not provide an express statutory right of [2] Elections 227(8) appeal to the Supreme Court; Supreme Court could 144k227(8) Mostappeal Cited as Cases treat candidate's a petition for a writ of When individual ballot is questioned, no voter is to certiorari. RSA 665:14. be disfranchised on a doubtful construction, and [2] Certiorari statutes tending to 4limit exercise of ballot should be 73k4 Most Cited Cases liberally construed in his or her favor. Even assuming the absence of a statutory right of [3] Elections appeal, the Supreme298(1) Court cannot be divested of its 144k298(1) Mosterrors CitedofCases power to correct law and other abuses, by Election laws generally vest primary responsibility writ of certiorari. for ascertaining intent and will of voters on election [3] Courtssubject 204 officials, to court's appropriate scope of re106k204 Most Cited Cases Page 1 Page 1 view when officials' determination is challenged in The superintending power of the Supreme Court a judicial proceeding. over inferior tribunals does not depend upon, and is [4] limited Elections not by, the 227(1) technical accuracy of designa144k227(1) Most Cited Cases tion of legal forms of action. No losing candidate is entitled to the electoral equi[4] Elections 300 which is a free shot somevalent of a "mulligan," 144k300 Most Cited times awarded to aCases golfer in nontournament play Voter presents question fact, not a queswhenintent preceding shotawas poorlyofplayed. tion of law. [5] Elections 298(3) [5] Administrative Law Cases and Procedure 741 144k298(3) Most Cited 15Ak741 Most 144k227(1)) Cited Cases (Formerly To secure judicial order for new municipal election, [5] Administrative Law and Procedure challenger is not required to establish that, but for 744.1 irregularities that he has established as a factual 15Ak744.1 Most Cited Cases matter, he would have prevailed in election; inIn the context of a writ of certiorari, the Supreme stead, court must be persuaded that (1) there were Court will not conduct a de novo review of the substantial errors in rulings of election official or evidence presented before an administrative officials, or substantial mistakes in count of votes, tribunal; the Supreme Court will, however, review a and (2) as a result of those errors or mistakes, relidecision of the administrative tribunal for legal erability of result of election, as determined by elecrors with respect to jurisdiction, authority, or obtion officials, is seriously in doubt. C.G.S.A. § servance of the law, causing it to arrive at a conclu9-328. sion which could not legally or reasonably be made or[6] causing it to act arbitrarily, capriciously, or with Elections 305(2) an144k305(2) unsustainable exercise of discretion. Most Cited Cases Although underlying facts are to be established by a [6] Elections 227(8) preponderance of evidence and are subject on ap144k227(8) Most Cited Cases peal to the clearly erroneous standard, ultimate deIf the intent of the voter can be determined with termination of whether, based on underlying facts, a reasonable certainty from an inspection of the balnew municipal election is called for, that is, whethlot, in light of the generally known conditions ater there were substantial violations of statute autendant upon the election, effect must be given to thorizing court to order new election that render rethat intent; if the voter's intent cannot thus be fairly liability of result of election seriously in doubt, is a and satisfactorily ascertained, the ballot cannot mixed question of fact and law that is subject to rightly be counted. plenary review on appeal. C.G.S.A. § 9-328; Practice Book 1998, §227(9) 60-5. [7] Elections 144k227(9) Most Cited Cases [7] Statutes 181(1) If a voter makes an appropriate mark for any can361k181(1) Most Cited Cases didate or office in substantial compliance with statute, vote should188 be counted. RSA 659:17. [7] the Statutes 361k188 Most Cited Cases [8] Elections 227(9) 144k227(9) Most Cited Cases 264 © 2008 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works. © 2008 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.