The Resolution of Election Disputes: Legal Principles that Control Election Challenges 736 A.2d 104 650 S.W.2d 510 241, 736 A.2d 104, 137 Ed. Law Rep. 1019 250 Conn. 650 S.W.2d 510,250 11 Conn. Ed. Law Rep. 354 (Cite as: 241, 736 A.2d 104) (Cite as: 650 S.W.2d 510) preponderance of the evidence that there were any illegal Court of Connecticut. votes sufficient toSupreme change the result of the election, or that a determination of the trueSteven will ofBORTNER the majority of the qualified v. was impossible. voters participating in said election TOWN OF WOODBRIDGE al. for ap*511 Willis Jarrel, Goodwin, Jarrel & Britain,etTyler, No. 16114. pellants. Argued June 11, 1999. Decided Aug. 17, 1999. This is a school bond election contest. Unsuccessful write-in candidate for elementary On November 1981, the Boardaction of Trustees Chapel board of 23, education brought against of town, reHill Independent in a specially called meetgistrars of School voters, District, and successful candidates, chaling, adopted resolution and based issuedonanalleged order voting for a bond lengingaelection results maelection for the issuance of $10,100,000 in bonds for the chine malfunctions. The Superior Court, Judicial District, pursuant the Haven, provisions of the J., Texas Education District of to New Pittman, ordered new Code, election. Articles 20.01 and 20.04, V.T.C.A., schoolCourt, buildDefendants appealed. The for Supreme ings, equipment sites. The(1) Board's order abused called the Borden, J.,and held that: trial court its elecdistion for December 8, 1981,toand a copy of saidto order was cretion in refusing open evidence consider published on November 25, 1981, in the Tyler election records offered by defendants, and Morning (2) new Telegraph, a newspaper of general circulation in the area. election was not warranted. Absentee voting began on November 25, 1981, as contemwith4c, direction. plated Reversed by Articleand 5.05remanded Subdivision Texas Election Code, V.A.C.S. Following the closing of the polls, a recount of the Berdon,the J.,result concurred opinion.of the bonds votes showed to be and 881 filed for issuance and 871 against issuance of the bonds, a majority of just ten West Headnotes votes. [1] Elections 8.1 144k8.1 Most Cited A contest was timely filed Cases by appellants and the trial judge Purpose of election statutes is to ensure the truevotes and voided eight "illegal" votes for and twelve "illegal" most accurate count possible of votes for candidates cast against the bonds, thus judicially determining the true resultsinofthe theelection. bond election to be 873 votes for, and 859 COLLEY, Justice. votes against, issuance of the bonds, being a majority of [2] Elections 227(8) fourteen. The trial court, without the intervention of a jury, 144k227(8) Most Cited Cases denied the contest of appellants and made and filed findings When individual ballot is questioned, no voter is to of fact and conclusions of law as discussed later in this be disfranchised on a doubtful construction, and opinion. statutes tending to limit exercise of ballot should be liberally in his or herasfavor. Appellant bringsconstrued three points of error follows: [3] Elections 298(1) 1. 144k298(1) Most Cited The error of the trial court inCases concluding that "IrregularitElection laws generally vest primary ies in the conduct of the election did not responsibility invalidate the for ascertaining intent and will of voters election election" and "The School Bond Election was on a legal and officials, subject to court's appropriate scope of revalid election." 196 Page 1 Page 2 view when officials' determination is challenged in 2. a judicial The error ofproceeding. the Court in concluding that "Irregularities in the conduct of the election did not affect or change the [4] Elections result of the election"227(1) and "Irregularities in the conduct of 144k227(1) Most Cited the election were not such Cases *512 as to render a determinaNooflosing candidate entitled to the tion the true will ofisthe majority of electoral the votersequiin the valent of a "mulligan," which is a free shot somebond election impossible." times awarded to a golfer in nontournament play when preceding shot was3.poorly played. The trial court erred in not ordering a new election when Electionsevidence 298(3) the[5]undisputed showed that the election officials 144k298(3) Most Cited made no effort to comply Cases with the law for conducting an (Formerly 144k227(1)) election. To secure order for claim new municipal election, Appellants, in judicial their argument, certain irregularities challenger is not required to establish that, butfailure for occurred in the conduct of the election because of the irregularities that he has established as a factual of the election officials to enforce certain provisions of the matter, he Code. would Chief have among prevailed in election; inTexas Election appellants' complaints are: stead, court must be persuaded that (1) there were errors in rulingscommenced of election on official (1)substantial that absentee voting the orday officials, or substantial mistakes in count of votes, (November 25, 1981) that notice of the election was puband (2) as a result of those errors or mistakes, relilished in the Tyler newspaper; resultballots of election, as determined by persons elec(2)ability "homeofmade" were used by the first six tion officials, is seriously in doubt. C.G.S.A. § voting absentee on November 25, 1981; (3)9-328. the signature and poll list used had no captions showing the election to which they pertained; [6] Elections 305(2) (4) voters who appeared to vote without their voter regis144k305(2) Most Cited Cases tration certificates were not sworn as to their qualificaAlthough underlying facts are to be established by a tions to vote; preponderance of evidence and are subject on ap(5) that 425 persons voted at said election without peal to the clearly erroneous standard, ultimate depresenting to the election officials current voter registratermination of whether, based on underlying facts, a tion certificates; new municipal election is called for, that is, wheth(6) the election judge failed to insure that "electioneering" er there were substantial violations of statute ausigns were not placed within prohibited areas adjacent to thorizing court to order new election that render rethe polling place; liability of result of election seriously in doubt, is a (7) that the election judge reported to certain "school offimixed question of fact and law that is subject to cials" before the polls closed that "the vote is close"; and plenary review on appeal. C.G.S.A. § 9-328; Prac(8) that 425 voters were permitted to vote at the election tice Book 1998, § 60-5. without presenting a current voter registration certificate and an affidavit as to their respective [7]without Statutesmaking181(1) qualifications. 361k181(1) Most Cited Cases [1] As earlier, the [7] stated Statutes 188trial court made and filed findings of fact and conclusions law in this case. Neither party to 361k188 Most CitedofCases this appeal challenges the same. From our examination of © 2006 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. © 2008 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.