« Ind. Decisions - 7th Circuit issues one Indiana decision today | Main | Ind. Decisions - "The Pros and Perils of Pro Se" »

Friday, December 28, 2007

Ind. Courts - Another mayorial election contest? It seems so

The Muncie Star-Press reports today, in a story by Douglas Walker, that "It's not over." Some quotes:

Democratic mayoral nominee James Mansfield announced late Thursday afternoon he was filing a petition seeking a "special election" in Muncie's Precinct 46, where a recount commission last week disallowed 19 ballots, making Republican Sharon McShurley the next mayor.

The recount commission had discovered 19 absentee ballot cards in Precinct 46 that were not endorsed with the initials of both a Republican and a Democratic election worker, as required by Indiana law. The ballots were missing the Republican initials.

The three-member recount commission on Dec. 20 officially certified McShurley as the winner in the Muncie mayoral race, reversing earlier results that had Mansfield winning by nine (and later 11) votes. * * *

Mans-field said the special election he's calling for -- only involving registered voters in Precinct 46 -- would be conducted at the former Claypool Elementary School, the eastside precinct's usual polling place.

"The voters in Precinct 46 exercised their constitutional rights to cast a ballot in this election only to be disenfranchised by the commission based on an error made by a Republican appointee in the Republican controlled county clerk's office," the Democrat said in the press release. "All voters in Precinct 46 deserve to have their votes counted."

Indianapolis attorney Bill Groth, who represents the plaintiffs in the voter ID suit to be argued before the SCOTUS in early January, and who begins his note to the ILB this morning by disclosing "I have provided informal assistance to the attorneys representing Mansfield", has sent the following:
The really interesting aspect of this from a lawyer’s perspective is whether the contest petition will be considered timely, since it clearly was filed outside the statutory time limits. On the other hand, Mansfield had no reason or grounds to file a contest after the election since he was 11 votes ahead and was certified by the clerk to be the winner. It wasn’t until the recount had been completed last week that his Republican opponent was declared the winner, based entirely on the disallowance of some 19 absentee ballots due to the missing initial, and only then did he learn of the problems with the absentee ballots from one precinct.

One of the arguments Mansfield’s attorneys will likely make is that the Court has jurisdiction under these circumstances to decide the issues raised by the contest petition, notwithstanding its facial untimeliness, based on equitable principles. The Supreme Court held in Pabey v. Pastrick that the time limits in the election contest and recount statutes can be extended under unusual or extraordinary circumstances, and it will be interesting to see if the court buys into that argument and finds that it has jurisdiction. This is a case that could well be on its way to our supreme court.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on December 28, 2007 11:19 AM
Posted to Indiana Courts