Bishop v. WSI
2012 ND 217
| N.D. | 2012Background
- Petition submitted May 22, 2012 to enact the North Dakota Medical Marijuana Act; Secretary approved for circulation June 4, 2012.
- August 6, 2012: 460 petitions with 20,092 signatures delivered; circulators’ affidavits stated signatures were in circulators’ presence and genuine.
- August–September 2012: investigation revealed forged signatures; six circulators admitted forging signatures; affidavits falsely swore signatures were genuine.
- September 4, 2012: Secretary of State notified Sponsoring Committee that 7,559 signatures could not be counted; 6,045 forged-signature signatures and 1,514 other invalid signatures identified.
- September 10, 2012: Secretary certified ballot for the November 6, 2012 election; controversy over whether ballot was “prepared” for purposes of timing for review.
- The Court assumed, for argument, the ballot was not prepared at certification and proceeded to address the merits of the Sponsoring Committee’s challenge to the Secretary’s sufficiency ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether forged circulator affidavits invalidate all signatures | Zaiser argues some signatures are valid despite forgery | Jaeger argues forged affidavits require discarding affected signatures | Yes; signatures on petitions with forged circulator affidavits may not be counted |
| Whether the Secretary may rely on sampling and discretionary methods to assess sufficiency | Committee contends Secretary must count signatures individually | Secretary has discretion to use sampling and information-gathering methods | Secretary’s sampling/discretion allowed; not required to mail 2,000 postcards |
| Whether the Secretary is estopped from not counting disputed signatures | Estoppel due to circulators' refusal to reaffirm affidavits | No estoppel; discretion to determine sufficiency remains | Estoppel rejected; Secretary’s duty to assess sufficiency stands |
| Whether the petition's infirmities render the measure non-qualifying under constitutional timing rules | If enough valid signatures exist overall, measure should qualify | Even with some valid signatures, forged affidavits invalidate those signatures; insufficient total | Dispositive: petitions insufficient to place on the ballot |
Key Cases Cited
- Hernett v. Meier, 173 N.W.2d 907 (N.D. 1970) (review of petition sufficiency; circulator affidavits and dates)
- Dawson v. Meier, 78 N.W.2d 420 (N.D. 1956) (signatures may not be counted where affidavits are not signed by affiant)
- Brousseau v. Fitzgerald, 675 P.2d 713 (Ariz. 1984) (false circulator affidavits void petitions; signatures not count)
- Graves v. State ex rel. Gongwer, 107 N.E. 1018 (Ohio 1913) (false affidavits invalidate entire petition part)
- Montanans for Justice v. State ex rel. McGrath, 146 P.3d 759 (Mont. 2006) (false circulator affidavits affect validity of signatures)
- In re Glazier, 378 A.2d 314 (Pa. 1977) (affidavits and signature authenticity controls)