Cox v. Laycock
2015 UT 20
Utah2015Background
- Millard County Republican primary (June 24, 2014) for County Commissioner Seat A produced a certified result with Withers declared winner by 5 votes after canvass and recount; Dyer challenged late-disclosed ballots and provisional ballots.
- Dyer and several voters filed an election-contest petition alleging at least 21 problematic votes; district court found eight defective votes and concluded the election's validity could not be established, set aside the primary, and ordered the county clerk to hold a new primary.
- Lieutenant Governor (Utah's chief elections officer) petitioned this court for extraordinary writ relief seeking to vacate the district court's order directing a new election and to affirm the certified primary result; he argued lack of standing below, statutory pleading/proof requirements, and that the court lacked authority to order a new election.
- This Court granted the lieutenant governor's petition, affirmed the district court's annulment of the election (as unappealed within the 10-day window), vacated the district court's order requiring a new election, and directed that the Republican candidacy be filled under the procedures analogous to Utah Code § 20A-1-501(1)(c)(iii).
- The Court held extraordinary writ appropriate because the lieutenant governor had no other plain, speedy, adequate remedy and the issues required prompt resolution before the general election.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Dyer / Voters or Lt. Gov) | Defendant's Argument (Withers / County) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proper petitioner / extraordinary writ | Lt. Gov: as chief elections officer he was harmed and had no other plain, speedy, adequate remedy because he was not a party below | District court respondents / Withers: petitioners below could have appealed; Lt. Gov. lacked stake to intervene | Court: granted writ — Lt. Gov had no other adequate remedy and timely sought relief |
| Statutory 10‑day appeal deadline effect | Lt. Gov: district court order annulling election should be reviewable despite 10‑day appeal rule because extraordinary writ is appropriate for flagrant abuses; some justices would reach merits | Majority: annulment became unassailable if not timely appealed; concurrence would rely on §20A‑4‑406(2) to void certificate | Court: majority affirms annulment (unappealed within 10 days) but (some disagreement) granted writ to review the order directing a new election |
| Sufficiency of election-contest pleading/proof | Lt. Gov: challenger must prove who received each contested vote and show how adding/subtracting those votes would change result; without that, contest fails | Dyer: statute requires alleging enough illegal/rejected votes to meet or exceed margin; proof of exact recipient not required at pleading stage | Court: challenger met pleading threshold (alleged > margin); district court properly annulled election when winner could not be determined |
| Authority to order a new (special) primary | Lt. Gov / County: election code does not authorize a court to order a new primary; district court exceeded authority | District court: equitable powers allowed ordering a new election to provide remedy | Court: ordering a new election exceeded statutory authority and was an abuse of discretion; that part of order vacated |
| Filling vacancy after annulled primary | Lt. Gov: party would be left without candidate if court's new-election order vacated; statute silent | Dyer / Voters asked for both candidates as unaffiliated on general ballot | Court: Code silent but legislative intent cannot leave a party candidateless; analogize to §20A‑1‑501 procedures — direct party central committee replacement per subsection (1)(c)(iii); denied cross-petition as procedurally improper |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Barrett, 127 P.3d 682 (Utah 2005) (discusses extraordinary writ standards and abuse-of-discretion review)
- Snow, Christensen & Martineau v. Lindberg, 299 P.3d 1058 (Utah 2013) (standards for Rule 65B extraordinary relief and remedies)
- Renn v. Utah State Board of Pardons, 904 P.2d 677 (Utah 1995) (permitting extraordinary writ where gross abuse of discretion and fairness demand review)
- Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. Lindberg, 238 P.3d 1054 (Utah 2010) (discusses extraordinary writ timeliness and remedies)
- Hi-Country Prop. Rights Grp. v. Emmer, 304 P.3d 851 (Utah 2013) (statutory-structure interpretation principles)
- W. Jordan v. Morrison, 656 P.2d 445 (Utah 1982) (limits on special-election authority under statute)