The Resolution of Election Disputes: Legal Principles that Control Election Challenges 736 A.2d 104 288 N.W.2d 902 250 Conn. 241, 736 A.2d 104, 137 Ed. Law Rep. 1019 288 N.W.2d 902 (Cite as: 250 Conn. 241, 736 A.2d 104) (Cite as: 288 N.W.2d 902) even casual observation. InConnecticut. what respect did CurSupreme Court of ran (the de facto officer) mistake either law or Steven BORTNER fact? He took possession v. of the office upon the assumption thatOF heWOODBRIDGE was declared duly elected by TOWN et al. the board legally constituted No. 16114.to decide that question. In this he was not in error, for the fact is Argued June 11, not 1999. conceded to be so. He acted, upon the fact of Aug. 17, the 1999. his election, Decided but simply upon fact that he was declared to be elected. Unsuccessful write-in candidate for elementary As to the law he made no mistake, for it will not board of education brought action against town, rebe denied that, as matters then stood, it was his gistrars of voters, and successful candidates, chalimperative duty to accept the fact to be as found lenging election results based on alleged voting maby the board and to occupy the place. chine malfunctions. The Superior Court, Judicial District of New Pittman, ordered Wonderlich servedHaven, in office only soJ.,long as henew reelection. Defendants appealed. The Supreme mained in possession of a valid certificate ofCourt, elecBorden, J.,the held that: court (1) trial courttoabused its distion which contest caused be issued, the cretion in refusing to open evidence to consider action of which was sustained by the district court. election records offered by defendants, (2) emnew He did so pursuant to the decisions ofand duly election was not warranted. powered governmental bodies whose decisions were later determined to be erroneous. Reversed and remanded with direction. [1][2] Rather than continuing to adhere to the maBerdon, J., concurred and filed opinion. jority position in the election contest context and deny the de facto official compensation for services West Headnotes rendered under a then valid certificate of election, [1] Elections 8.1 we conclude both the public interest in having 144k8.1 Mostthat Cited Cases the office filled and its duties the Purpose of election statutes is todischarged ensure the and true and aforementioned equitable considerations mandate most accurate count possible of votes for candidates reversal of our prior position. We hold that the de in the election. jure officeholder who ultimately prevails in an election may not recover from the de facto officeholder [2] Elections 227(8) the salary he or she received 144k227(8) Most Cited Caseswhile serving in office during the pendency of the contest litigation. [FN2] When individual ballot is questioned, no voter is to We are not at this on timea called upon to decide from be disfranchised doubtful construction, and whom Devine may have recourse for salary due, statutes tending to limit exercise of ballot should be and do notconstrued intimate in anyhisview on favor. this issue. liberally or her FN2. We 298(1) note again that our holding is [3] Elections limited byCited section 62.20. Incumbent office144k298(1) Most Cases who choose to remain in office Electionholders laws generally vest primary responsibility while challenging an adverse judgment for ascertaining intent and will of voters on election the to contest court are thus scope outside officials,from subject court's appropriate of the rescope of this ruling. Page 1 Page 4 view when officials' determination is challenged in mary judgment in favor of Devine, and remand this a judicial proceeding. case for dismissal of plaintiff's petition. [4] Elections 227(1) REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIREC144k227(1) Most Cited Cases TIONS. No losing candidate is entitled to the electoral equivalent of a "mulligan," which is a free shot some288 N.W.2d 902to a golfer in nontournament play times awarded when preceding shot was poorly played. END OF DOCUMENT [5] Elections 298(3) 144k298(3) Most Cited Cases (Formerly 144k227(1)) To secure judicial order for new municipal election, challenger is not required to establish that, but for irregularities that he has established as a factual matter, he would have prevailed in election; instead, court must be persuaded that (1) there were substantial errors in rulings of election official or officials, or substantial mistakes in count of votes, and (2) as a result of those errors or mistakes, reliability of result of election, as determined by election officials, is seriously in doubt. C.G.S.A. § 9-328. [6] Elections 305(2) 144k305(2) Most Cited Cases Although underlying facts are to be established by a preponderance of evidence and are subject on appeal 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 We therefore reverse the trial court's grant of sum212 © 2008 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.