CHAPTER 149*

ELECTIONS AND PRIMARIES: CONTESTED

*Cited. 220 C. 682.

Table of Contents

Sec. 9-323. Contests and complaints in election of presidential electors, U.S. senator and representative.

Sec. 9-324. Contests and complaints in election of state officers and judges of probate.

Sec. 9-325. Appeals and reservations of law to be taken to Supreme Court.

Sec. 9-326. Contest in election of sheriff or judge of probate.

Sec. 9-327. Bond of complainant.

Sec. 9-328. Contests and complaints in election of municipal officers and nomination of justices of the peace.

Sec. 9-329. Appeal to Supreme Court.

Sec. 9-329a. (Formerly Sec. 9-449). Contests and complaints in connection with any primary.

Sec. 9-329b. Removal of candidate’s name from ballot.

Sec. 9-330. Examination and testing of tabulators.

Sec. 9-331. Tie vote for or vacancy in office of sheriff.

Sec. 9-332. Adjourned election in tie vote. Withdrawal of candidate.


Sec. 9-323. Contests and complaints in election of presidential electors, U.S. senator and representative. Any elector or candidate who claims that he is aggrieved by any ruling of any election official in connection with any election for presidential electors and for a senator in Congress and for representative in Congress or any of them, held in his town, or that there was a mistake in the count of the votes cast at such election for candidates for such electors, senator in Congress and representative in Congress, or any of them, at any voting district in his town, or any candidate for such an office who claims that he is aggrieved by a violation of any provision of section 9-355, 9-357 to 9-361, inclusive, 9-364, 9-364a or 9-365 in the casting of absentee ballots at such election, may bring his complaint to any judge of the Supreme Court, in which he shall set out the claimed errors of such election official, the claimed errors in the count or the claimed violations of said sections. In any action brought pursuant to the provisions of this section, the complainant shall file a certification attached to the complaint indicating that a copy of the complaint has been sent by first-class mail or delivered to the State Elections Enforcement Commission. If such complaint is made prior to such election, such judge shall proceed expeditiously to render judgment on the complaint and shall cause notice of the hearing to be given to the Secretary of the State and the State Elections Enforcement Commission. If such complaint is made subsequent to the election, it shall be brought not later than fourteen days after the election or, if such complaint is brought in response to the manual tabulation of paper ballots authorized pursuant to section 9-320f, such complaint shall be brought not later than seven days after the close of any such manual tabulation, and in either such circumstance, the judge shall forthwith order a hearing to be had upon such complaint, upon a day not more than five or less than three days from the making of such order, and shall cause notice of not less than three or more than five days to be given to any candidate or candidates whose election may be affected by the decision upon such hearing, to such election official, to the Secretary of the State, to the State Elections Enforcement Commission and to any other party or parties whom such judge deems proper parties thereto, of the time and place for the hearing upon such complaint. Such judge, with two other judges of the Supreme Court to be designated by the Chief Court Administrator, shall, on the day fixed for such hearing and without unnecessary delay, proceed to hear the parties. If sufficient reason is shown, such judges may order any voting tabulators to be unlocked or any ballot boxes to be opened and a recount of the votes cast, including absentee ballots, to be made. Such judges shall thereupon, in the case they, or any two of them, find any error in the rulings of the election official, any mistake in the count of such votes or any violation of said sections, certify the result of their finding or decision, or the finding or decision of a majority of them, to the Secretary of the State before the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December. Such judges may order a new election or a change in the existing election schedule, provided such order complies with Section 302 of the Help America Vote Act, P.L. 107-252, as amended from time to time. Such certificate of such judges, or a majority of them, shall be final upon all questions relating to the rulings of such election officials, to the correctness of such count and, for the purposes of this section only, such claimed violations, and shall operate to correct the returns of the moderators or presiding officers so as to conform to such finding or decision.

(1949 Rev., S. 1107; 1953, S. 801d; 1963, P.A. 307; P.A. 78-125, S. 6; P.A. 83-583, S. 2, 6; P.A. 84-511, S. 4, 15; P.A. 87-545, S. 1; P.A. 88-364, S. 14, 123; P.A. 95-88, S. 4; P.A. 04-74, S. 1; P.A. 05-288, S. 47; P.A. 07-194, S. 2; P.A. 10-43, S. 5; P.A. 11-20, S. 1.)

History: 1963 act added provisions re defeated candidate in first sentence, increased time within which a complaint may be brought from 3 to 10 days after election, clarified the counting of absentee ballots and changed the date by which certification must be made; P.A. 78-125 added candidate as claimant to aggrievement, deleted “the moderator of any election” following “ruling of” and substituted “any election official in connection with any election”, deleted provisions pertaining to defeated candidates, provided for judge to proceed expeditiously on complaint when made prior to election, provided for notice of hearing to election official, changed authority to assign judges to hear case to the chief court administrator, provided that judges may order a new election or a change in the existing election schedule and deleted provision for substitution in case judge unable to serve; P.A. 83-583 required a complainant to send or deliver a copy of the complaint to the state elections commission and required a judge to give notice of a hearing to the secretary of the state and the state elections commission; P.A. 84-511 changed name of elections commission to elections enforcement commission; P.A. 87-545 allowed candidate to bring complaint under this section if he claims that he is aggrieved by violation of any provision of Secs. 9-355, 9-357 to 9-361, inclusive, 9-364, 9-364a or 9-365 in casting of absentee ballots; P.A. 88-364 made technical change; P.A. 95-88 changed time within which a complaint shall be brought from 10 to 14 days; P.A. 04-74 qualified judges’ authority to order a new election or a change in existing election schedule by adding “, provided such order complies with Section 302 of the Help America Vote Act, P.L. 107-252, as amended from time to time”, effective May 10, 2004; P.A. 05-288 made technical changes, effective July 13, 2005; P.A. 07-194 added deadline for filing of complaint if complaint is brought in response to manual tabulation of paper ballots authorized pursuant to Sec. 9-320f and made technical changes, effective July 5, 2007; P.A. 10-43 replaced requirement that complainant send by first-class mail or hand-deliver a copy of complaint to State Elections Enforcement Commission with requirement that complainant file a certification attached to complaint indicating that a copy of complaint has been sent by first-class mail or delivered to said commission; pursuant to P.A. 11-20, “machines” was changed editorially by the Revisors to “tabulators”, effective May 24, 2011.

Cited. 186 C. 125; 231 C. 602. Plaintiff lacked standing to bring complaint as plaintiff did not allege any act or conduct by defendant that interpreted a statute, regulation or other authoritative legal requirement applicable to the election process or identify any mandatory statute that defendant had failed to apply or follow. 289 C. 522. Plaintiff who failed to demonstrate he was nominated by a major or minor party as defined in Sec. 9-372 and failed to obtain and timely file the requisite number of signatures to secure a place on the ballot as a petitioning candidate as required by Sec. 9-453a was not entitled to a place on ballot simply because his name mistakenly appeared on voter guide prior to deadline for completion of voter guide. 298 C. 808.

Sec. 9-324. Contests and complaints in election of state officers and judges of probate. Any elector or candidate who claims that such elector or candidate is aggrieved by any ruling of any election official in connection with any election for Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of the State, State Treasurer, Attorney General, State Comptroller or judge of probate, held in such elector’s or candidate’s town, or that there has been a mistake in the count of the votes cast at such election for candidates for said offices or any of them, at any voting district in such elector’s or candidate’s town, or any candidate for such an office who claims that such candidate is aggrieved by a violation of any provision of section 9-355, 9-357 to 9-361, inclusive, 9-364, 9-364a or 9-365 in the casting of absentee ballots at such election or any candidate for the office of Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of the State, State Treasurer, Attorney General or State Comptroller, who claims that such candidate is aggrieved by a violation of any provision of sections 9-700 to 9-716, inclusive, may bring such elector’s or candidate’s complaint to any judge of the Superior Court, in which such elector or candidate shall set out the claimed errors of such election official, the claimed errors in the count or the claimed violations of said sections. In any action brought pursuant to the provisions of this section, the complainant shall send a copy of the complaint by first-class mail, or deliver a copy of the complaint by hand, to the State Elections Enforcement Commission. If such complaint is made prior to such election, such judge shall proceed expeditiously to render judgment on the complaint and shall cause notice of the hearing to be given to the Secretary of the State and the State Elections Enforcement Commission. If such complaint is made subsequent to the election, it shall be brought not later than fourteen days after the election or, if such complaint is brought in response to the manual tabulation of paper ballots authorized pursuant to section 9-320f, such complaint shall be brought not later than seven days after the close of any such manual tabulation and, in either such circumstance, such judge shall forthwith order a hearing to be had upon such complaint, upon a day not more than five nor less than three days from the making of such order, and shall cause notice of not less than three nor more than five days to be given to any candidate or candidates whose election may be affected by the decision upon such hearing, to such election official, the Secretary of the State, the State Elections Enforcement Commission and to any other party or parties whom such judge deems proper parties thereto, of the time and place for the hearing upon such complaint. Such judge shall, on the day fixed for such hearing and without unnecessary delay, proceed to hear the parties. If sufficient reason is shown, such judge may order any voting tabulators to be unlocked or any ballot boxes to be opened and a recount of the votes cast, including absentee ballots, to be made. Such judge shall thereupon, in case such judge finds any error in the rulings of the election official, any mistake in the count of the votes or any violation of said sections, certify the result of such judge’s finding or decision to the Secretary of the State before the fifteenth day of the next succeeding December. Such judge may order a new election or a change in the existing election schedule. Such certificate of such judge of such judge’s finding or decision shall be final and conclusive upon all questions relating to errors in the rulings of such election officials, to the correctness of such count, and, for the purposes of this section only, such claimed violations, and shall operate to correct the returns of the moderators or presiding officers, so as to conform to such finding or decision, unless the same is appealed from as provided in section 9-325.

(1949 Rev., S. 1105; 1953, S. 802d; 1963, P.A. 363; P.A. 78-125, S. 7; P.A. 83-583, S. 3, 6; P.A. 84-511, S. 5, 15; P.A. 87-545, S. 2; P.A. 95-88, S. 5; P.A. 00-99, S. 32, 154; Oct. 25 Sp. Sess. P.A. 05-5, S. 43; P.A. 07-194, S. 3; P.A. 11-20, S. 1.)

History: 1963 act added provisions re defeated candidate in first sentence, increased time within which complaint may be brought from 3 to 10 days after election, clarified counting of absentee ballots and changed date by which certification of decision must be made; P.A. 78-125 changed application to “any elector or candidate who claims that he is aggrieved by any ruling of an election official in connection with any election”, added sheriff and judge of probate to the enumerated offices, deleted provisions pertaining to defeated candidates, provided for expeditious handling of complaints made prior to election, provided for notice to “such election official”, provided that judge may order a new election or a change in the existing election schedule and deleted provision for substitution in case judge unable to serve; P.A. 83-583 required a complainant to send or deliver a copy of the complaint to the state elections commission and required a judge to give notice of a hearing to the secretary of the state and the state elections commission; P.A. 84-511 changed name of elections commission to elections enforcement commission; P.A. 87-545 allowed candidate to bring complaint under this section if he claims that he is aggrieved by violation of any provision of Secs. 9-355, 9-357 to 9-361, inclusive, 9-364, 9-364a or 9-365 in casting of absentee ballots; P.A. 95-88 changed time within which a complaint shall be brought from 10 to 14 days; P.A. 00-99 deleted reference to sheriff, effective December 1, 2000; Oct. 25 Sp. Sess. P.A. 05-5 authorized complaint by candidate for state office who claims aggrievement by violation of provision of Secs. 9-700 to 9-716, inclusive, and made technical changes, effective December 31, 2006, and applicable to elections held on or after that date; P.A. 07-194 added deadline for filing of complaint if complaint is brought in response to manual tabulation of paper ballots authorized pursuant to Sec. 9-320f, effective July 5, 2007; pursuant to P.A. 11-20, “machines” was changed editorially by the Revisors to “tabulators”, effective May 24, 2011.

As to possible jurisdiction of superior court to declare election of state officers, see 61 C. 372; 77 C. 599; 82 C. 330. Cited. 186 C. 125; 205 C. 495; 231 C. 602.

Superior court judge may not order recount of ballots for state legislators. 6 CS 435. Section broadly states, in clear and unambiguous terms, that a violation of Secs. 9-700 to 9-716 provides a candidate aggrieved by such violation a cause of action. 51 CS 483.

Sec. 9-325. Appeals and reservations of law to be taken to Supreme Court. If, upon any such hearing by a judge of the Superior Court, any question of law is raised which any party to the complaint claims should be reviewed by the Supreme Court, such judge, instead of filing the certificate of his finding or decision with the Secretary of the State, shall transmit the same, including therein such questions of law, together with a proper finding of facts, to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who shall thereupon call a special session of said court for the purpose of an immediate hearing upon the questions of law so certified. A copy of the finding and decision so certified by the judge of the Superior Court, together with the decision of the Supreme Court, on the questions of law therein certified, shall be attested by the clerk of the Supreme Court, and by him transmitted to the Secretary of the State forthwith. The finding and decision of the judge of the Superior Court, together with the decision of the Supreme Court on the questions of law thus certified, shall be final and conclusive upon all questions relating to errors in the rulings of the election officials and to the correctness of such count and shall operate to correct the returns of the moderators or presiding officers so as to conform to such decision of said court. Nothing in this section shall be considered as prohibiting an appeal to the Supreme Court from a final judgment of the Superior Court. The judges of the Supreme Court may establish rules of procedure for the speedy and inexpensive hearing of such appeals within fifteen days of such judgment of a judge of the Superior Court.

(1949 Rev., S. 1106; 1953, S. 803d; P.A. 78-125, S. 10.)

History: P.A. 78-125 changed limiting day in December by which decision of supreme court to be transmitted to secretary of the state to “forthwith”, changed reference to errors in rulings of “moderator” to “election officials”, clarified authority of supreme court to rule on final judgment of superior court and provided for establishment of rules for speedy hearing of appeals.

Procedure considered. 77 C. 595. See 82 C. 330. Cited. 186 C. 125; 205 C. 495; 231 C. 602.

Sec. 9-326. Contest in election of sheriff or judge of probate. Section 9-326 is repealed.

(1949 Rev., S. 1096; 1953, S. 804d; P.A. 78-125, S. 13.)

Sec. 9-327. Bond of complainant. The complainant in any complaint or proceeding under sections 9-323, 9-324, 9-328 or 9-329a, shall give a good and sufficient bond for prosecution for the payment of costs, and the judge or judges hearing such application shall make such order regarding the payment of the costs in such action as may be equitable and may render judgment and issue execution therefor.

(1949 Rev., S. 1113; 1953, S. 805d; P.A. 78-125, S. 8.)

History: P.A. 78-125 deleted “for the correction of errors of a moderator or for a recount of votes” and cross referenced Secs. 9-323, 9-324, 9-328 or 9-449.

Sec. 9-328. Contests and complaints in election of municipal officers and nomination of justices of the peace. Any elector or candidate claiming to have been aggrieved by any ruling of any election official in connection with an election for any municipal office or a primary for justice of the peace, or any elector or candidate claiming that there has been a mistake in the count of votes cast for any such office at such election or primary, or any candidate in such an election or primary claiming that he is aggrieved by a violation of any provision of sections 9-355, 9-357 to 9-361, inclusive, 9-364, 9-364a or 9-365 in the casting of absentee ballots at such election or primary, may bring a complaint to any judge of the Superior Court for relief therefrom. In any action brought pursuant to the provisions of this section, the complainant shall send a copy of the complaint by first-class mail, or deliver a copy of the complaint by hand, to the State Elections Enforcement Commission. If such complaint is made prior to such election or primary, such judge shall proceed expeditiously to render judgment on the complaint and shall cause notice of the hearing to be given to the Secretary of the State and the State Elections Enforcement Commission. If such complaint is made subsequent to such election or primary, it shall be brought not later than fourteen days after such election or primary, except that if such complaint is brought in response to the manual tabulation of paper ballots, authorized pursuant to section 9-320f, such complaint shall be brought not later than seven days after the close of any such manual tabulation, to any judge of the Superior Court, in which he shall set out the claimed errors of the election official, the claimed errors in the count or the claimed violations of said sections. Such judge shall forthwith order a hearing to be had upon such complaint, upon a day not more than five nor less than three days from the making of such order, and shall cause notice of not less than three nor more than five days to be given to any candidate or candidates whose election or nomination may be affected by the decision upon such hearing, to such election official, the Secretary of the State, the State Elections Enforcement Commission and to any other party or parties whom such judge deems proper parties thereto, of the time and place for the hearing upon such complaint. Such judge shall, on the day fixed for such hearing and without unnecessary delay, proceed to hear the parties. If sufficient reason is shown, he may order any voting tabulators to be unlocked or any ballot boxes to be opened and a recount of the votes cast, including absentee ballots, to be made. Such judge shall thereupon, if he finds any error in the rulings of the election official or any mistake in the count of the votes, certify the result of his finding or decision to the Secretary of the State before the tenth day succeeding the conclusion of the hearing. Such judge may order a new election or primary or a change in the existing election schedule. Such certificate of such judge of his finding or decision shall be final and conclusive upon all questions relating to errors in the ruling of such election officials, to the correctness of such count, and, for the purposes of this section only, such claimed violations, and shall operate to correct the returns of the moderators or presiding officers, so as to conform to such finding or decision, except that this section shall not affect the right of appeal to the Supreme Court and it shall not prevent such judge from reserving such questions of law for the advice of the Supreme Court as provided in section 9-325. Such judge may, if necessary, issue his writ of mandamus, requiring the adverse party and those under him to deliver to the complainant the appurtenances of such office, and shall cause his finding and decree to be entered on the records of the Superior Court in the proper judicial district.

(1949 Rev., S. 527; 1953, S. 806d; 1957, P.A. 526, S. 7; 1963, P.A. 163; P.A. 74-109, S. 8, 11; P.A. 78-125, S. 9; P.A. 83-583, S. 4, 6; P.A. 84-511, S. 6, 15; P.A. 87-545, S. 3; P.A. 95-88, S. 6; P.A. 07-194, S. 5; P.A. 11-20, S. 1.)

History: 1963 act reduced time within which a complaint may be brought from 60 to 10 days after the election and conformed procedure to be followed to that for contests in state offices; P.A. 74-109 changed reference to “election” to the office of justice of the peace to “nominated of a primary” and conformed the other references to that office accordingly, effective upon adoption of Senate Joint Resolution No. 22 of the 1973 session as an amendment to the constitution of Connecticut; P.A. 78-125 clarified application of section to “elector or candidate claiming to have been aggrieved by any ruling of any election official in connection with an election”, provided for expeditious handling of complaint made prior to election or primary and where complaint is made subsequent to election or primary, for notice to election official, further provided that judge may order a new election or primary or a change in the existing election schedule, deleted qualification of “for the reservation of questions arising therefrom” to the right of appeal to the supreme court and also deleted the qualification “by consent of all parties” from “reserving such questions of law” and cross referenced Sec. 9-325, and deleted provision for substitution in case judge unable to serve; P.A. 83-583 required a complainant to send or deliver a copy of the complaint to the state elections commission and required a judge to give notice of a hearing to the secretary of the state and the state elections commission; P.A. 84-511 changed name of elections commission to elections enforcement commission; P.A. 87-545 allowed candidate to bring complaint under this section if he claims that he is aggrieved by violation of any provision of Secs. 9-355, 9-357 to 9-361, inclusive, 9-364, 9-364a or 9-365 in casting of absentee ballots; P.A. 95-88 changed time within which a complaint shall be brought from 10 to 14 days; P.A. 07-194 added deadline for filing of complaint if complaint is brought in response to manual tabulation of paper ballots authorized pursuant to Sec. 9-320f and made technical changes, effective July 5, 2007; pursuant to P.A. 11-20, “machines” was changed editorially by the Revisors to “tabulators”, effective May 24, 2011.

Information should show relator’s election. Alleged errors must appear to be injurious. Certificate of judge is conclusive. 51 C. 113. Provision is constitutional. Id.; 102 C. 588. Appeal to supreme court carries stay of execution. 62 C. 488. Quo warranto is a means to oust an illegal incumbent, but not to induct the rightful person. 66 C. 294; 102 C. 595. Facts held to justify order of judge that ballot boxes be opened; mere irregularities in arrangement of polling places not enough to invalidate election. 75 C. 50. Pleading; after ballots recounted, errors in interlocutory rulings immaterial. 85 C. 396; 102 C. 587. Petition fails in case of first selectman if vote is found to be a tie. 91 C. 371. Cited. 101 C. 735. Judge should embody decision in judgment file. 104 C. 398. Cited. 124 C. 276. Defendant, not being a member of one of two parties polling largest and next largest vote, was not eligible for office. 136 C. 632. Proper procedure to question validity of form of absentee ballot used. 145 C. 648. Section held to confer right of judicial appeal from moderator’s rulings or recanvass. Prior invoking of Sec. 9-311a no bar. 155 C. 68, 73, 74. In case brought by minority representatives under Sec. 9-167a, held supreme court had no jurisdiction over November, 1967, election of New Haven board of aldermen ordered by the U.S. district court as election was a creature of the district court and it was that court’s prerogative to determine what candidates were elected. 156 C. 253. Cited. 175 C. 545; 182 C. 111 (Diss. Op.). The bare existence in statute of authority to order a new election does not require the court to proceed as if that remedy were to be implemented. Since a new election was not sought by the parties or contemplated by the court it was not necessary to include as parties candidates whose election was not affected by the suit. Id. Cited. 186 C. 125. Constitutional claims not included in provisions for expedited judicial procedures. 205 C. 495. Cited. 225 C. 378; 231 C. 602. Court should exercise caution and restraint in deciding whether to order new election; two-part standard established for such decisions; plenary scope of review of trial court decision is appropriate, no special need for speed and finality for trial court decision under circumstances of this case; “rulings of the election official” defined, and “mistake in the count of the votes” interpreted and applied. 250 C. 241. Municipality is not indispensable to court’s subject matter jurisdiction over challenge to a municipal election. 277 C. 829.

Cited. 8 CS 234; 10 CS 258. Statutory petition does not preclude plaintiff from seeking to have writ of mandamus issued. 18 CS 72. Cited. 21 CS 482.

Sec. 9-329. Appeal to Supreme Court. Section 9-329 is repealed.

(1949 Rev., S. 528; 1953, S. 807d; P.A. 78-125, S. 13; 78-280, S. 2, 127.)

Sec. 9-329a. (Formerly Sec. 9-449). Contests and complaints in connection with any primary. (a) Any (1) elector or candidate aggrieved by a ruling of an election official in connection with any primary held pursuant to (A) section 9-423, 9-425 or 9-464, or (B) a special act, (2) elector or candidate who alleges that there has been a mistake in the count of the votes cast at such primary, or (3) candidate in such a primary who alleges that he is aggrieved by a violation of any provision of sections 9-355, 9-357 to 9-361, inclusive, 9-364, 9-364a or 9-365 in the casting of absentee ballots at such primary, may bring his complaint to any judge of the Superior Court for appropriate action. In any action brought pursuant to the provisions of this section, the complainant shall file a certification attached to the complaint indicating that a copy of the complaint has been sent by first-class mail or delivered to the State Elections Enforcement Commission. If such complaint is made prior to such primary such judge shall proceed expeditiously to render judgment on the complaint and shall cause notice of the hearing to be given to the Secretary of the State and the State Elections Enforcement Commission. If such complaint is made subsequent to such primary it shall be brought, not later than fourteen days after such primary, or if such complaint is brought in response to the manual tabulation of paper ballots, described in section 9-320f, such complaint shall be brought, not later than seven days after the close of any such manual tabulation, to any judge of the Superior Court.

(b) Such judge shall forthwith order a hearing to be held upon such complaint upon a day not more than five nor less than three days after the making of such order, and shall cause notice of not less than three days to be given to any candidate or candidates in any way directly affected by the decision upon such hearing, to such election official, to the Secretary of the State, the State Elections Enforcement Commission and to any other person or persons, whom such judge deems proper parties thereto, of the time and place of the hearing upon such complaint. Such judge shall, on the day fixed for such hearing, and without delay, proceed to hear the parties and determine the result. If, after hearing, sufficient reason is shown, such judge may order any voting tabulators to be unlocked or any ballot boxes to be opened and a recount of the votes cast, including absentee ballots, to be made. Such judge shall thereupon, if he finds any error in the ruling of the election official, any mistake in the count of the votes or any violation of said sections, certify the result of his finding or decision to the Secretary of the State before the tenth day following the conclusion of the hearing. Such judge may (1) determine the result of such primary; (2) order a change in the existing primary schedule; or (3) order a new primary if he finds that but for the error in the ruling of the election official, any mistake in the count of the votes or any violation of said sections, the result of such primary might have been different and he is unable to determine the result of such primary.

(c) The certification by the judge of his finding or decision shall be final and conclusive upon all questions relating to errors in the ruling of such election official, to the correctness of such count, and, for the purposes of this section only, such alleged violations, and shall operate to correct any returns or certificates filed by the election officials, unless the same is appealed from as provided in section 9-325. In the event a new primary is held pursuant to such Superior Court order, the result of such new primary shall be final and conclusive unless a complaint is brought pursuant to this section. The clerk of the court shall forthwith transmit a copy of such findings and order to the Secretary of the State.

(June, 1955, S. 608d; November, 1955, S. N93; 1958 Rev., S. 9-121; 1963, P.A. 17, S. 73; 1969, P.A. 622, S. 1; P.A. 78-125, S. 12; P.A. 82-426, S. 7, 14; P.A. 83-583, S. 5, 6; P.A. 84-511, S. 7, 15; P.A. 86-164, S. 1, 2; P.A. 87-203, S. 1; 87-545, S. 4; P.A. 95-88, S. 7; P.A. 97-154, S. 3, 27; P.A. 03-241, S. 7; P.A. 07-194, S. 4; P.A. 10-43, S. 6; P.A. 11-20, S. 1.)

History: 1963 act restated prior provisions; 1969 act clarified application of section as to who may bring complaint and expanded the remedies available; P.A. 78-125 further clarified who may bring complaint and provided for expeditious handling of complaint made prior to primary and deleted provision for substitution of judge; in 1979 Sec. 9-449 transferred to Sec. 9-329a; P.A. 82-426 amended section to apply to paper ballots and absentee ballots, to allow judge to change primary schedule and to order new primary; P.A. 83-583 required a complainant to send or deliver a copy of the complaint to the state elections commission and required a judge to give notice of a hearing to the secretary of the state and the state elections commission; P.A. 84-511 changed name of elections commission to elections enforcement commission; P.A. 86-164 changed time limit for appeal from 3 to 5 days; P.A. 87-203 changed time limit for appeal from 5 to 10 days; P.A. 87-545 allowed candidate to bring complaint under this section if he claims that he is aggrieved by violation of any provision of Secs. 9-355, 9-357 to 9-361, inclusive, 9-364, 9-364a or 9-365 in casting of absentee ballots; P.A. 95-88 changed time within which a complaint shall be brought from 10 to 14 days; P.A. 97-154 divided section into Subsecs., inserted Subdiv. and Subpara. indicators in Subsec. (a), adding Subdiv. (1)(B) re primary held pursuant to a special act, effective July 1, 1997 (Revisor’s note: In Subsec. (a)(2) the word “or” in the phrase “candidate or who” was deleted editorially by the Revisors for grammatical correctness); P.A. 03-241 deleted reference to Sec. 9-424 and made technical changes in Subsec. (a)(1), effective January 1, 2004, and applicable to primaries and elections held on or after that date; P.A. 07-194 amended Subsec. (a) to add deadline for filing of complaint if complaint is brought in response to manual tabulation of paper ballots authorized pursuant to Sec. 9-320f and make a technical change, effective July 5, 2007; P.A. 10-43 amended Subsec. (a) to replace requirement that complainant send by first-class mail or hand-deliver a copy of complaint to State Elections Enforcement Commission with requirement that complainant file a certification attached to complaint indicating that a copy of complaint has been sent by first-class mail or delivered to said commission; pursuant to P.A. 11-20, “machines” was changed editorially by the Revisors to “tabulators” in Subsec. (b), effective May 24, 2011.

Cited. 186 C. 125; 205 C. 495; 220 C. 682; 231 C. 602. Court has no authority to postpone a general election in an action pursuant to section under any circumstances. 284 C. 793; Id., 805; Id., 815; Id., 823. When election statute mandates certain procedures, and election official has filed to apply or to follow those procedures, such conduct implicitly constitutes an incorrect interpretation of requirements of statute and, therefore, is a ruling of an election official. 285 C. 618. Ordinary rules of evidence apply in election contests; there is no special obligation for a court to exercise its discretion in favor of admitting evidence. Id. Before a court is able to ascertain whether there was any official action that constituted a ruling, evidence must be presented as to reason for alleged violation of election law or who was responsible for such violation. Id., 657. An improper ruling by election official re appointment of official counters does not entitle plaintiff to new election if cause of unreliability in election results is an alleged miscount, rather than ruling. Id. As a general rule, a recount of vote is appropriate remedy when plaintiff has alleged simple counting mistake under Subsec. (a) rather than far more drastic remedy of new primary election in absence of any showing that recount would have been futile or otherwise inappropriate. Id.

Under former section, respondents were deprived of right to vote in a Democratic party primary, but court could not order new election as it had to act in strict conformity with statute which authorized recount only. 28 CS 85.

Subsec. (b):

Despite requirement that parties be heard “without delay”, if plaintiff’s failure to correctly cite section as basis for action does not prevent defendants from adequately preparing for trial, then defendant may not prevail on a motion to dismiss based on such failure. 285 C. 618.

Sec. 9-329b. Removal of candidate’s name from ballot. At any time prior to a primary held pursuant to sections 9-423, 9-425 and 9-464, or a special act or prior to any election, the Superior Court may issue an order removing a candidate from a ballot where it is shown that said candidate is improperly on the ballot.

(P.A. 78-125, S. 5; P.A. 97-154, S. 4, 27; P.A. 03-241, S. 8; P.A. 11-20, S. 1.)

History: P.A. 97-154 applied section to a primary held pursuant to a special act, effective July 1, 1997; P.A. 03-241 deleted reference to Sec. 9-424, effective January 1, 2004, and applicable to primaries and elections held on or after that date; pursuant to P.A. 11-20, “ballot label” was changed editorially by the Revisors to “ballot”, effective May 24, 2011.

See Sec. 9-323 re contests and complaints in election of presidential electors, U.S. senator and U.S. representative.

See Sec. 9-324 re contests and complaints in election of state officers and probate judges.

See Sec. 9-328 re contests and complaints in election of municipal officers and in nomination of justices of the peace.

See Sec. 9-329a re contests and complaints in connection with primaries.

Sec. 9-330. Examination and testing of tabulators. Any judge having jurisdiction over any action brought under section 9-323, 9-324, 9-328 or 9-329a shall have the power, if sufficient reason is shown, to order the examination and testing of any voting tabulators.

(1957, P.A. 526, S. 8; P.A. 78-125, S. 11; P.A. 97-154, S. 5, 27; P.A. 11-20, S. 1.)

History: P.A. 78-125 deleted reference to Sec. 9-326, repealed by the same act; P.A. 97-154 inserted reference to Sec. 9-329a, effective July 1, 1997; pursuant to P.A. 11-20, “machines” was changed editorially by the Revisors to “tabulators”, effective May 24, 2011.

Sec. 9-331. Tie vote for or vacancy in office of sheriff. Section 9-331 is repealed, effective December 1, 2000.

(1949 Rev., S. 1095; 1953, S. 809d; P.A. 00-99, S. 153, 154.)

Sec. 9-332. Adjourned election in tie vote. Withdrawal of candidate. If the electors fail to choose a candidate for any office by reason of an equality of votes at any election, and no provision is otherwise made by law for the election of a candidate to such office, such election shall stand adjourned for three weeks at the same hour at which the first election was held. Ballots of the same form and description as described in sections 9-250 to 9-256, inclusive, except that such ballots shall contain only the names of the candidates for whom the same are to be voted, shall be used in the election on such adjourned day, and the election shall be conducted in the same manner as on the first day, except that the votes shall be cast for such officer only. Ballots for such election shall be provided forthwith by the clerk of the municipality wherein such election stands adjourned, and such clerk shall furnish the Secretary of the State with an accurate list of all candidates to be voted for at such adjourned election. The clerk of the municipality wherein such election so stands adjourned shall, at least three days prior to the day of such adjourned election, give notice of the day, hours, place and purpose thereof by publishing such notice in a newspaper published in such municipality or having a circulation therein. No such election shall be held if prior to such election all but one of the candidates for such office die, withdraw their names or for any reason become disqualified to hold such office, and, in such event, the remaining candidate shall be deemed to be lawfully elected to such office. No withdrawal shall be valid until the candidate who has withdrawn has filed a letter of withdrawal signed by such candidate with the Secretary of the State or, in the case of a municipal office, until the candidate who has withdrawn has filed a letter of withdrawal signed by such candidate with the municipal clerk. When such an election is required to be held under the provisions of this section for any office other than a municipal office, and prior to such election all but one of the candidates for such office die, withdraw their names or for any reason become disqualified to hold such office, the Secretary of the State shall forthwith notify the clerk of each municipality wherein such election was to have been held of such fact, and shall forthwith direct each such clerk that such election shall not be held. In the case of a multiple opening office only the names of those candidates whose votes are equal shall be placed on the ballot of the adjourned election.

(1949 Rev., S. 1085; 1953, S. 808d; 1959, P.A. 50; 1961, P.A. 259; P.A. 80-281, S. 15, 31; P.A. 95-88, S. 8; P.A. 11-20, S. 1.)

History: 1959 act provided for three days notice of new day, hours, place and purpose of adjourned election; 1961 act provided that election not be held when all candidates but one have died, withdrawn, or become disqualified; P.A. 80-281 changed from one to two weeks the time in which the election stands adjourned and further provided that in the case of a multiple opening office only names of candidates whose votes are equal shall be placed on ballot; P.A. 95-88 changed time an election stands adjourned from two to three weeks; pursuant to P.A. 11-20, “ballot label” and “ballot labels” were changed editorially by the Revisors to “ballot” and “ballots”, respectively, effective May 24, 2011.

See Sec. 9-173 re plurality vote required for election.

See Sec. 9-188 re tie vote in election of first selectman.

See Sec. 9-218 re tie vote in election of probate judge.

See Sec. 9-315 re tie vote in election of presidential electors.

Moderator, town clerk and selectman have no power to make statute effective and mandamus does not lie against them. 130 C. 717.