The Resolution of Election Disputes: Legal Principles that Control Election Challenges 736 A.2d 104 753 1101 250A.2d Conn. 241, 736 A.2d 104, 137 Ed. Law Rep. 1019 164 N.J. 468, A.2d 1101 (Cite as: 250753 Conn. 241, 736 A.2d 104) (Cite as: 164 N.J. 468, 753 A.2d 1101) Court of142 Connecticut. ent." In re Supreme Moffat, supra, N.J.Super. at 224, BORTNER 361 A.2d 74. TheSteven standard we apply is one of reasonable certainty as v.opposed to absolute OF Fifteen WOODBRIDGE al. certitude. TOWN In re Voters, etsupra, 129 16114. N.J.Super. at 302, 323No. A.2d 521. ArguedofJune 11, 1999. Report dated The Official Board Canvassers Aug. 17, 1999. November 2, Decided 1999, indicates that eighty-three people entered the voting booth and did not cast a Unsuccessful candidate for could elementary vote for mayor, write-in and that 215 votes that have board of education brought action against town,Alrebeen cast for borough council were not cast. gistrars of voters, and successful candidates, chalthough some voters may have simply decided not to lenging resultsthere basedison voting mavote for election those offices, a alleged strong possibility chine malfunctions. The Superior Court, Judicial that enough of those "missing votes" were not cast District of New Haven, Pittman, J., ordered new because of the confusing personal choice instrucelection. Defendants appealed. The Supreme Court, tions. Cf. In re Moffat, supra, 142 N.J.Super. at Borden, 361 J., held trial court its dis225-26, A.2dthat: 74(1) (finding thatabused discrepancy cretion in refusing to open evidence to consider between number of persons who used malfunctionelection offered defendants, and (2) new ing votingrecords machines and by votes for sole open office election was not warranted. suggested certain votes rejected). One witness testified to that effect, and other witnesses corrobReversed and remanded with direction. orated how difficult it was to cast a write-in vote even though voters ultimately were able to do Berdon, J., those concurred and filed opinion. so. West Headnotes Although it would 8.1 have been preferable to have [1] Elections more voters testify at the hearing, we recognize that 144k8.1 Most Cited Cases concerns about privacy, riPurpose of election statutesembarrassment, is to ensure the and true and dicule may prevent voters from coming forward to most accurate count possible of votes for candidates offer in thetestimony election. that they did not vote because they could not understand the instructions. See id. at 225, 361 A.2d 74; In re Klayman, supra, 97 [2] Elections 227(8) N.J.Super. 299,Cited 235 Cases A.2d 45. Because Sturgis 144k227(8)atMost and Geiger would ballot have lost by about only ten votes When individual is questioned, no voter is to ifbethedisfranchised voided write-in were construction, counted, onlyand a on avotes doubtful small number oftothe "missing" would have statutes tending limit exercise votes of ballot should be changed election. liberallythe construed in hisAccordingly, or her favor. we conclude that Sturgis and Geiger also meet the statutory *484 [3] Electionsfor successfully 298(1) requirement contesting the results 144k298(1) Most Cited Cases of the council election. [FN3] Election laws generally vest primary responsibility FN3. Since petitioners have demonstrated for ascertaining intent and will of voters on election "legaltovotes [have been] rejected officials,that subject court's appropriate scopeatofthe repolls sufficient to change the result," N.J.S.A. 19:29-1(e), we need not decide whether further grounds exist to contest 262 Page 1 Page 9 view when officials' determination is challenged in a judicial theproceeding. election. [4] Elections 227(1)III Cited Cases we cannot determIn144k227(1) light of allMost the circumstances, Nowith losing candidatecertainty is entitled to the electoral who equiine reasonable those candidates valent ofa amajority "mulligan," free shot received of thewhich votes isfora either the somemayawarded council to a golfer play ortimes or borough seats.in nontournament See In re Fifteen when preceding shotN.J.Super. was poorly at played. Voters, supra, 129 302, 323 A.2d 521. Therefore, we declare the election for the of[5] Elections 298(3) council null and void. fices of mayor and borough 144k298(3) Most Cited Cases A special election must be held to fill the resulting (Formerly 144k227(1)) vacancies "not less than 45 days nor more than 50 To secure order fordate newofmunicipal election, days" fromjudicial the effective this opinion. challenger is not required to establish that, for N.J.S.A. 40A:16-16. The Camden County but Clerk irregularities that he has established as a factual must, at least thirty days preceding the election, matter, would arrangements have prevailed in the election; inmake the he necessary with postmasstead, courtsample must beballots persuaded thatand (1) notify there were ter to have mailed, the substantial errors in rulings of election commissioner of registration in writing toofficial that ef-or officials, or substantial in count must of votes, fect. N.J.S.A. 19:49-4(c).mistakes The election be and (2) as a result of those errors or mistakes, reliconducted as it was on the original election day, exability result of be election, as determined eleccept thatofthere must adequate instructions by as outtion officials, is seriously in doubt. C.G.S.A. lined below and the election will be limited to the§ 9-328. of mayor and borough council. N.J.S.A. offices 19:27-1. Petitioners' names will not appear on the [6] Elections 305(2) face of the ballot and they will not have a new op144k305(2) Most Cited Cases portunity to petition to have their names placed on Although underlying facts are to be established by a the ballot as they did not earlier comply with preponderance of evidence and are subject on apN.J.S.A. 19:13-3 or N.J.S.A. 19:14-2.1. peal to the clearly erroneous standard, ultimate determination whether, based underlying [11] For theofnew election, andonfor all futurefacts, elec-a new municipal election is called for, that is, whethtions throughout the state, explicit instructions on er there were substantial of statutewith auhow to cast a write-in voteviolations must be provided thorizing to order new election voters. that render rethe samplecourt ballots sent to registered The liability of result of election seriously in doubt, is instructions must offer clear, step-by-step directionsa mixed question of fact andoflaw is subject that describe the mechanics the that voting machine,to plenaryhow review on appeal. C.G.S.A.and § 9-328; explain to operate the windows levers,Pracand tice Book 1998, § 60-5. emphasize the need to cast write-in votes on the appropriate lines. Voters must be warned that an im[7] Statutes 181(1) properly cast vote will be deemed void. 361k181(1) Most Cited Cases *485 Similarly clear and informative instructions [7] Statutes 188 must be provided at the polling place. Election of361k188 Most Cited Cases ficials must prominently **1111 display outside the voting machines a copy of the reformulated poster explaining personal choice that is located inside the voting booth. As a general rule, any of the instruc- © 2008 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.