In re Gray-Sadler 736 A.2d 104 753Conn. A.2d 241, 1101736 A.2d 104, 137 Ed. Law Rep. 1019 250 164 N.J. 468, 753 A.2d (Cite as: 250 Conn. 241,1101 736 A.2d 104) (Cite as: 164 N.J. 468, 753 A.2d 1101) Supreme Courtthe of voting Connecticut. tions contained inside machines should Steven the BORTNER be displayed outside voting machines so that v. to read the instructions voters have an opportunity TOWN OF WOODBRIDGE et al. may have in advance and pose any questions they No. 16114. to the election officials. Arguedthat June 11, 1999. model and/or [12] It is preferred a mechanical Decided 17, 1999. demonstration voting Aug. machine be available to instruct voters, but unlike the voting instructions, Unsuccessful candidate for elementary they are notwrite-in absolutely required. Although board of education brought action against reN.J.S.A. 19:48-1(l ) states that all votingtown, machines gistrars of voters, and successful candidates, chal"shall be provided with a mechanical model, illuslenging results voting matrating election the manner of based votingon onalleged the machine, suitchine malfunctions. The Superior Court, Judicial able for the instruction of voters," N.J.S.A. 19:50-3 District of the New Haven, J., ordered new adds that model mustPittman, be provided only if "pracelection. Defendants appealed. The Supreme Court, ticable." When interpreting different statutory proBorden, (1) trial its dis-to visions,J.,weheld are that: obligated to court make abused every effort cretion in refusing to open evidence to consider harmonize them, even if they are in apparent conelection records offered by defendants, and 130, (2) new flict. State v. Federanko, 26 N.J. 119, 139 election was not warranted. A.2d 30 (1958); Builders League of South Jersey, Inc. v. Pine Hill, 286 N.J.Super. 348, 352, 669 A.2d Reversed and remanded with direction. 279 (App.Div.1996). Reading those provisions in pari materia, we conclude that the latter modifies Berdon, J., concurred and filed opinion. the former to require the provision of a model only when it will not be a heavy burden on the locality. West Headnotes Consequently, the Borough of Chesilhurst has [1] Elections if 8.1 difficulty in procuring either an accurate and com144k8.1 Most Cited Cases plete mechanical Purpose of election model statutesorisatodemonstration ensure the truevoting and machine, it need notpossible provideofthose most accurate count votesaids. for candidates in the election. For this election, however, there is only one polling place with two voting [2] Elections 227(8)machines. Thus, providing an extra machine for Cases instructional purposes is not 144k227(8) Most Cited likelyindividual to be an ballot undue isburden. Respondents When questioned, no voter isconto that the extra is feasible here, butand exbecede disfranchised onmachine a doubtful construction, press concern cost ofofextra statutes tending about to limitthe exercise ballotmachines should bein future elections polling places are liberally construedwhen in his multiple or her favor. used. We do not require that there be an extra vot[3] 298(1)elections, but rather that an ingElections machine for future 144k298(1) Most Cited Cases extra machine be provided when a mechanical *486 Election laws generally vesttheprimary responsibility model is unavailable and extra machine would for intent and will of voters on election notascertaining be a great burden to obtain. officials, subject to court's appropriate scope of reChesilhurst argues that Camden County should be responsible for the costs of the special election because the county breached its contract to provide Page 1 Page 10 view when officials' determination is challenged in a Chesilhurst judicial proceeding. with legally compliant voting machines, election workers, and printed ballots. See [4] Elections 227(1) N.J.S.A. 19:8-6, 19:48-3.17, 19:48-3.18 (providing 144k227(1) Most Cited Cases that local municipalities rent voting machines, perNo losingand candidate is entitled to the electoral equisonnel, ballots from the county). After oral arvalent of a "mulligan," which is a free shot somegument we were informed by counsel for Camden times awarded a golfer in in nontournament play County that a tonew election Chesilhurst would when preceding shot was poorly played. cost approximately $9,000. We agree with the trial court that, in these circumstances, Camden County [5] Elections 298(3) should fund the costs of the special election. 144k298(3) Most Cited Cases (Formerly 144k227(1))IV To secure judicialoforder new municipal election, The judgment the for Appellate Division is rechallenger is not required to establish that, but for versed. A special election is to be held in Chesilirregularities that he has established as a factual hurst for the offices of mayor and borough council matter, he would election; as set forth herein.have Weprevailed defer the in effective datein-of stead, court must be 31, persuaded (1) the there were this opinion to July 2000, tothat permit schedulsubstantial errors in rulings of election official or ing of the special election in September 2000 purofficials, or substantial mistakes in count of votes, suant to N.J.S.A. 40A:16-16. and (2) as a result of those errors or mistakes, reliability of result of election, as PORITZ determined elecFor reversal--Chief Justice andbyJustices tion officials,STEIN, is seriously in doubt.LONG, C.G.S.A. § O'HERN, COLEMAN, VER9-328. NIERO and LaVECCHIA. [6]Opposed--None. Elections 305(2) 144k305(2) Most Cited Cases 164 N.J. underlying 468, 753 A.2d Although facts1101 are to be established by a preponderance of evidence and are subject on apEND OF DOCUMENT peal to the clearly erroneous standard, ultimate determination of whether, based on underlying facts, a new municipal election is called for, that is, whether there were substantial violations of statute authorizing court to order new election that render reliability of result of election seriously in doubt, is a mixed question of fact and law that is subject to plenary review on appeal. C.G.S.A. § 9-328; Practice Book 1998, § 60-5. [7] Statutes 181(1) 361k181(1) Most Cited Cases [7] Statutes 188 361k188 Most Cited Cases 263 © 2008 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.