In re McDonough
736 A.2d 104
816Conn.
A.2d 241,
1022736 A.2d 104, 137 Ed. Law Rep. 1019
250
149
N.H.
105,
816 A.2d
1022A.2d 104)
(Cite as: 250 Conn.
241, 736
(Cite as: 149 N.H. 105, 816 A.2d 1022)
Supreme
of Connecticut.
A vote should
notCourt
be counted
for a candidate in a
BORTNER
race in which Steven
the voter
clearly did not intend to
v.
vote.
TOWN OF WOODBRIDGE et al.
[9] Elections
219
No. 16114.
144k219 Most Cited Cases
June
Voters are notArgued
required
to 11,
vote1999.
for all offices in an
Decided Aug. 17, 1999.
election.
Unsuccessful
[10] Electionswrite-in
219candidate for elementary
board
of education
brought
144k219
Most Cited
Casesaction against town, registrars
of voters,
successfulbycandidates,
chal-to
A voter's
intent isand
determined
giving weight
lenging
election
results
on alleged
votingofmaall marks
placed
on based
the ballot,
regardless
the
chine
malfunctions.
Superior
Judicial
method
by which theThe
voter
chose toCourt,
cast a vote.
District of New Haven, Pittman, J., ordered new
[11] Elections
219
election.
Defendants appealed.
The Supreme Court,
144k219
Most
Cited
Cases
Borden, J., held that: (1) trial court abused its disMarks in
on refusing
a ballot may
not beevidence
ignored. to consider
cretion
to open
election records offered by defendants, and (2) new
[12] Elections
227(1)
election was not warranted.
144k227(1) Most Cited Cases
The Supreme
Court will
void an election beReversed
and remanded
withnot
direction.
cause of mere irregularities or technicalities in the
Berdon,
concurred
and filed
opinion.
form of J.,
a ballot,
election,
or vote.
Headnotes
[13] Elections West
219
[1]
Elections
8.1 Cases
144k219
Most Cited
144k8.1
Most an
Cited
Casesdispute, the Supreme Court
In resolving
election
Purpose
statutes
is to
true to
andall
strives of
to election
enfranchise
voters
byensure
givingthe
effect
most
accurate
marks
on the count
ballot.possible of votes for candidates
in the election.
[14] Elections
219
[2]
Elections
227(8)
144k219
Most Cited
Cases
144k227(8)
Most
Cited Cases
In resolving
an election
dispute, the Supreme Court
When
individual
is questioned,
no voter
to
strives
to avoid ballot
diluting
votes by counting
as isvotes
bemarks
disfranchised
a doubtful
construction,
and
that were on
intended
to indicate
the voter's
instatutes
tent to tending
abstain. to limit exercise of ballot should be
liberally construed in his or her favor.
[15] District and Prosecuting Attorneys
2(1)
[3]
Elections
298(1)
131k2(1)
Most Cited
Cases
144k298(1) Most Cited Cases
[15] Elections
292vest primary responsibility
Election
laws generally
144k292
Most
Cited
for ascertaining intent Cases
and will of voters on election
Evidencesubject
was not
sufficient
to rebut statutory
preofficials,
to court's
appropriate
scope of resumption that voters intended their straight ticket
votes to apply to skipped races, and thus ballots in
which the voter voted a straight ticket and did not
Page 1
Page 2
view when officials' determination is challenged in
a make
judicial
proceeding.
any
mark for candidates in county attorney
race were credited toward straight ticket party can[4]
Elections
227(1)
didate,
where voter
left seven or more out of twelve
144k227(1)
Most
Cited
Cases
races blank. RSA 659:17.
No losing candidate is entitled to the electoral equivalent
of a "mulligan,"
which isAttorneys
a free shot some[16] District
and Prosecuting
2(1)
times
awarded
a golfer
131k2(1)
MosttoCited
Casesin nontournament play
when preceding shot was poorly played.
[16] Elections
295(1)
[5]
Elections Most298(3)
144k295(1)
Cited Cases
144k298(3)
Most
Cases to support a conclusion
Evidence was
notCited
sufficient
(Formerly
144k227(1))were so confusing as to inthat
ballot instructions
To
securewith
judicial
orderright,
for new
municipal
election,
terfere
a voter's
if any,
to understandable
challenger
is not required
to establish
that,
but for
ballot instructions,
in county
attorney
candidate's
irregularities
that heeven
has though
established
as a factual
election dispute,
candidate's
expert
matter,
he
would
have
prevailed
in
election;
testified regarding the confusing nature of theininstead,
court evidence
must be persuaded
that (1) there
structions;
did not demonstrate
that were
voters
substantial
errors in the
rulings
of election official or
did not understand
instructions.
officials, or substantial mistakes in count of votes,
[17](2)Prohibition
1 errors or mistakes, reliand
as a result of those
314k1
Most
Cited
Cases
ability of result of election, as determined by election officials, is seriously in doubt. C.G.S.A. §
[17] Prohibition
10(1)
9-328.
314k10(1) Most Cited Cases
A Elections
writ of prohibition
is an extraordinary writ used
[6]
305(2)
to
prevent
an
inferior
tribunal or agency from im144k305(2) Most Cited Cases
properly
exercising
jurisdiction
notestablished
granted. by a
Although underlying facts are to be
preponderance of evidence and are subject on ap[18] Prohibition
1
peal to the clearly erroneous standard, ultimate de314k1 Most Cited Cases
termination of whether, based on underlying facts, a
A writ of prohibition is granted with extreme caunew municipal election is called for, that is, whethtion, and then, only when the right to relief is clear.
er there were substantial violations of statute authorizing
court to order
new election that render re227(1)
[19] Elections
liability
of
result
of
election
seriously in doubt, is a
144k227(1) Most Cited Cases
mixed
question
of
fact
and
law that
subjecteither
to
To set aside an election, a party
mustis prove
plenary
reviewleaves
on appeal.
C.G.S.A.
9-328;inPracfraud which
the intent
of the§voters
doubt
tice
Book
1998,
§
60-5.
or irregularities in the conduct of the election of
such a nature as to affect the result.
[7] Statutes
181(1)
**1024 *106 Nixon Peabody, LLP, of Manchester
361k181(1) Most Cited Cases
(W. Scott O'Connell and Patricia L. Peard on the
brief,
and Mr. O'Connell
orally), and Shaheen and
[7] Statutes
188
Gordon,
of
Concord
(Steven
M. Gordon on the
361k188 Most Cited Cases
brief), for the petitioner.
Stephen J. Judge, acting attorney general (Anne M.
Edwards, associate attorney general, and Orville B.
265
© 2008 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents