Crossman v. Board of Election Commissioners
966 N.E.2d 518
Ill. App. Ct.2012Background
- Crossman filed a verified objection to Montes’s nominating papers alleging forged signatures and signatures by non-district or repeat-signers, and a pattern of fraud and amendments to the statement of candidacy after signing/notarization.
- Board reviewed voter records: required 1,000 signatures; Montes gathered 1,750; 572 invalid; 1,178 valid signatures remained.
- Hearing officer found Montes did not engage in a pattern of fraud; Donahue made minor, post-signature changes to the statement of candidacy before notarization.
- Board overruled objections, finding Montes’s statement of candidacy substantially compliant and that the pattern of fraud claim was not clearly erroneous.
- Crossman petition for judicial review was denied by the circuit court; appeal challenged Board’s findings; standard of review was clearly erroneous per appellate review.
- Court affirmed circuit court’s judgment, upholding Board’s decision to place Montes’s name on the ballot.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Montes engaged in a pattern of fraud invalidating signatures | Crossman—pattern of fraud on sheets; strikings | Montes—no pattern; credibility to Board | Not clearly erroneous; Board’s finding affirmed |
| Whether Donahue’s post-signature changes invalidated the statement of candidacy | Crossman—changes rendered invalid | Montes—changes cosmetic; substantial compliance | Substantial compliance; changes not fatal |
| Whether sanctions are warranted against Crossman for bad-faith petition | Crossman—sanctions not addressed | Montes—sanctions requested | Lacks jurisdiction; sanctions not warranted |
Key Cases Cited
- Harmon v. Town of Cicero Municipal Officers Electoral Board, 371 Ill. App. 3d 1111 (2007) (Board may strike signatures; discretionary ruling upheld in context)
- Sullivan v. County Officers Electoral Board of Du Page County, 225 Ill. App. 3d 691 (1992) (minor errors not fatal if office unambiguous and no confusion)
- Cinkus v. Village of Stickney Municipal Officers Electoral Board, 228 Ill. 2d 200 (2008) (review is of board decision; clearly erroneous standard)
- City of Belvidere v. Illinois State Labor Relations Board, 181 Ill. 2d 191 (1998) (clearly erroneous review framework for board decisions)
- AFM Messenger Service, Inc. v. Department of Employment Security, 198 Ill. 2d 380 (2001) (clearly erroneous standard of review applied to factual findings)
- Bowe v. Chicago Electoral Board, 79 Ill. 2d 469 (1980) (mandatory provisions; invalid signatures consequence)
- Canter v. Cook County Officers Electoral Board, 170 Ill. App. 3d 364 (1988) (discretionary treatment of questioned signatures)