Preview:

Final Copy 288 Ga. 26 S10A1329. SCOGGINS et al. v. COLLINS et al.

THOMPSON, Justice. This appeal arises out of a dispute between appellants Oritha "Rick" Scoggins and Veverly Brooks and appellees Gloria Collins, Wanda Wallace, Cynthia Stamps-Jones and Stan Byars concerning the results of the November 2009 general election in the city of Riverdale. Scoggins and Brooks were unsuccessful candidates for the office of city council for Ward 1 and Ward 3 of the city of Riverdale. After the polls closed on November 3, 2009, Collins, the election superintendent, collected the results from the voting machines. Machine 145241 initially recorded zero votes. During recertification of the election results three days later, however, the same machine recorded 60 votes which were included in the final election results. Stamps-Jones and Wallace were certified as the winners of the Ward 1 and Ward 3 races respectively. Appellants filed a petition in superior court challenging the results of the election, specifically alleging that Collins and others acted illegally and fraudulently by including the 60 votes in the final results, allowing Byars

to be placed on the ballot in the Ward 3 race, and permitting a banner advertising a food drive sponsored by Wallace to be placed in front of city hall in the weeks before the election. After a hearing on the merits, the trial court directed a verdict in favor of appellees on all counts. The trial court entered its order granting appellees' motion for directed verdict on December 18, 2009. Appellants filed their notice of appeal on December 23, 2009, and on January 4, 2010 filed in this Court a motion for expedited appeal and supersedeas. The motion was denied on January 8, 2010. Having reviewed the record, we dismiss part of the appeal as moot and affirm in part. 1. We conclude as an initial matter that appellants' challenge to the inclusion of Byars' name on the ballot constitutes a pre-election challenge rendered moot by the occurrence of the general election. See Bodkin v. Bolia, 285 Ga. 758, 759-760 (684 SE2d 241) (2009); Randolph County v. Johnson, 282 Ga. 160, 161 (1) (646 SE2d 261) (2007). See also Brooks v. Brown, 282 Ga. 154, 154 (646 SE2d 265) (2007) (in general, pre-election challenges to a candidate's qualifications become moot once the general election at issue has occurred); Jordan v. Cook, 277 Ga. 155, 157 (587 SE2d 52) (2003) (same). The issue of Byars' qualification to run for office is not of the type capable of
2

repetition yet evading review. Therefore, we dismiss as moot that portion of the appeal challenging the inclusion of Byars' name on the November 2009 ballot. Compare City of Greenville v. Bray, 284 Ga. 641, 641 (670 SE2d 98) (2008) and Randolph County, supra, 282 Ga. at 161 (2) with Poythress v. Moses, 250 Ga. 452, 453 (1) (298 SE2d 480) (1983). Appellants' remaining claims involve proper post-election challenges timely raised pursuant to OCGA

Download S10A1329. SCOGGINS v. COLLINS.pdf

Georgia Law