Bortner v. Town of Woodbridge 736 A.2d 104 736250 A.2d 104 241, 736 A.2d 104, 137 Ed. Law Rep. 1019 Conn. 250(Cite Conn. A.2d 104, 137 Ed. 104) Law Rep. 1019 as:241, 250736 Conn. 241, 736 A.2d (Cite as: 250 Conn. 241, 736 A.2d 104) Supreme Court of Connecticut. different voting districts, means the regisSteveninBORTNER trars of voters the voting district in v. which, at the last-preceding election, the TOWN OF WOODBRIDGE presiding officer for the purposeetofal.declarNo. ing the result of the16114. vote of the whole municipality was moderator." Argued June 11, 1999. 17, 1999.§ 9-311a FN10. Decided GeneralAug. Statutes provides: "For purposes of this section, Unsuccessful write-in elementary state, district and candidate municipal for offices shall board be of as education brought action against town, defined in section 9-372 except that registrars of voters, and successful candidates, chalthe office of presidential elector shall be lenging election resultsoffice. based onForthwith alleged voting deemed a state after amachine regular malfunctions. The Superior Court, Judicial or special election for municipal District of New Haven, Pittman, J., ordered office, or forthwith upon tabulation of thenew election. appealed. Theoffices Supreme voteDefendants for state and district by Court, the Borden, J., held that: (1) trial court abused its Secretary of the State, when at any suchdiscretionelection in refusing to open consider the plurality of evidence an electedtocandidelection records offered by defendants, and ate for an office over the vote for a(2)de-new election was candidate not warranted. feated receiving the next highest number of votes was either (1) less than a Reversed and remanded with direction. vote equivalent to one-half of one per cent of the total number votes cast for the ofBerdon, J., concurred andoffiled opinion. fice but not more than two thousand votes, or (2) less than twenty votes, there shall be West Headnotes a recanvass of [1] Elections 8.1the returns of the voting machine or Cited votingCases machines and absentee bal144k8.1 Most lotsofused in such election for such Purpose election statutes is to ensure the office true and unless such defeated candidate most accurate count possible of votes or fordefeated candidates in the candidates, election. as the case may be, for such office file a written statement waiving this [2] Elections right to such227(8) canvass with the municipal 144k227(8) Most Cases clerk in the Cited case of a municipal office, or Whenwith individual ballot is questioned, nothe voter is to the Secretary of the State in case be disfranchised on a doubtful construction, of a state or district office. In the case ofand statutes tending to limit offices, exercisethe of ballot should state and district Secretary of be liberally construed in his or her favor. the State upon tabulation of the votes for such offices shall notify the town clerks in [3] Elections 298(1) the state or district, as the case may be, of 144k298(1) Most Cited Cases the state and district offices which qualify Election laws generally vest primary responsibility for an automatic recanvass and shall also for ascertaining intent and will of voters on election notify each candidate for any such office. officials, subject to court's appropriate scope of reWhen a recanvass is to be held the municipal clerk shall promptly notify the moderator, as defined in section 9-311, who Page 1 Page 8 view when officials' determination is challenged in a judicial shallproceeding. proceed forthwith to cause a recanvass of such returns of the office in ques[4] Elections 227(1) tion in the same manner as is provided in 144k227(1) Most Cited said section 9-311.Cases In addition to the noNo losing candidateunder is entitled the electoral equitice required sectionto9-311, the modvalenterator of a "mulligan," which is a free shot someshall before such recanvass is made times give awarded to in a golfer play notice writinginofnontournament the time when, when and preceding shot was poorly played. place where, such recanvass is to be made to each candidate for a municipal of[5] Elections 298(3) fice which qualifies for an automatic re144k298(3) Most Cited Cases canvass under this section. Nothing in (Formerly 144k227(1)) this section shall preclude the right to judiTo secure judicial order for new municipal election, cial proceedings on behalf of a candidate challenger is not required to establish that, but for under any provision of chapter 149. For irregularities that he has established as a factual the purposes of this section, 'the total nummatter, he would have prevailed in election; inber of votes cast for the office' means in stead, court must be persuaded that (1) there were the case of multiple openings for the same substantial errors in rulings of election official or office, the total number of electors checked officials, or substantial mistakes in count of votes, as having voted in the state, district, muniand (2) as a result of those errors or mistakes, relicipality or political subdivision, as the case ability of result of election, as determined by elecmay be. When a recanvass of the returns tion officials, is seriously in doubt. C.G.S.A. § for an office for which there are multiple 9-328. openings is required by the provisions of this section, 305(2) the returns for all candidates [6] Elections for all openings the office shall be re144k305(2) Most Citedfor Cases canvassed. No one other a recanvass Although underlying facts are to than be established by a official shall take part in the recanvass. preponderance of evidence and are subject onIfapin the recanvass peal toany theirregularity clearly erroneous standard, procedure ultimate deis noted by a candidate, be permittermination of whether, based he on shall underlying facts, a ted to present evidence of such irregularity new municipal election is called for, that is, whethin any contest relatingviolations to the election." er there were substantial of statute authorizing court to order new election that render re**110 *250 In his complaint, the plaintiff, relying liability of result of election seriously in doubt, is a on § 9-328, [FN11] alleged that voters desiring to mixed question of fact and law that is subject to vote for him were prevented from doing so by votplenary review on appeal. C.G.S.A. § 9-328; Pracing machine malfunctions, which included the foltice Book 1998, § 60-5. lowing: one or more of the machines ran out of paper[7] forStatutes casting write-in ballots; on one or more of 181(1) the361k181(1) machines, Most the sections for write-in candidates Cited Cases were not accessible because the metal *251 doors would not open; on188 one or more of the machines, [7] Statutes the361k188 paper for theCited write-in candidates did not adMost Cases vance properly; and on one or more of the machines, the write-in slots were not readily visible to or accessible for voters of short stature. The 177 © 2008 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.