The Resolution of Election Disputes: Legal Principles that Control Election Challenges 622 S.W.2d 686 622 S.W.2d 686 (Cite as: 622 S.W.2d 686) Page 1 Court of Appeals of Kentucky. Patsy JERNIGAN, Appellant, v. Jessie Pearl CURTIS, Appellee. No. 81-CA-1996-MR Oct. 28, 1981. Discretionary Review Denied Oct. 30, 1981. Appeal was taken from judgment of the Monroe Circuit Court, Terrill A. Wilson, Special Judge, upholding political party primary election for office of circuit court clerk. The Court of Appeals, McDonald, J., held that: (1) vote that was illegally openly cast could not be counted at all; (2) with respect to precinct in which over 500 votes were cast, circuit judge did not err in refusing to throw out vote of precinct because of seven vote discrepancy between voting machine total and clerk's checklist, improper assistance given in less than ten voters' cases, and insubstantial open voting; and (3) where officers in a second precinct made little effort to properly perform their functions, husbands and wives entered voting booths together, voters were illegally assisted, and there was evidence of bribery of voters on significant scale, precinct election was so tainted with fraud that result must be discarded and election determined on basis of remaining votes. Order accordingly. West Headnotes [1] Elections 154(9.1) 144k154(9.1) Most Cited Cases (Formerly 144k154(91/4), 144k154(9), 144k154, 144k154(1/4)) Since election contest was filed and summons issued within time period required by statute and contestee received actual service of the summons, contestee could not complain of any technical defect in service of summons if there was one. [2] Elections 158 144k158 Most Cited Cases Vote that was illegally openly cast could not be counted at all. 294 [3] Elections 154(10) 144k154(10) Most Cited Cases Evidence supported finding that voters had not been assisted in any way when they voted, contrary to their contention that they had received improper assistance at precinct and that their votes were not cast for candidate they had intended to vote for. [4] Elections 154(10) 144k154(10) Most Cited Cases In election contest, evidence supported finding that two persons who voted at one precinct had not been residents of county and were therefore not entitled to vote at that precinct or in the political party primary election for county office. [5] Elections 158 144k158 Most Cited Cases In action contesting results of primary election in precinct in which over 500 votes were cast, circuit judge did not err in refusing to throw out vote of precinct because of seven vote discrepancy between voting machine total and clerk's checklist, improper assistance given in less than ten voters' cases, and insubstantial open voting. [6] Elections 158 144k158 Most Cited Cases For vote of precinct to be thrown out for irregularity in conduct of election, the proof must be of such flagrant, extensive and corrupt violations of election laws as to destroy the fairness and equality of election. [7] Elections 158 144k158 Most Cited Cases Where precinct officers made little effort to properly perform their functions at primary election, husbands and wives entered voting booths together, voters were illegally assisted, and there was evidence of bribery of voters on significant scale, precinct election was so tainted with fraud that result must be discarded and election determined on basis of remaining votes. *687 James C. Jernigan, Tompkinsville, David L. Williams, Burkesville, for appellant. Joe L. Travis, Tompkinsville, for appellee. © 2006 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works.