Riemers v. Jaeger, 916 N.W.2d 113

Roland Riemers was the sole Libertarian candidate for North Dakota secretary of state in the June 12, 2018 primary and received 247 votes; 300 votes were required to be nominated under statute.
The highest vote for the office was 54,563 for Republican Will Gardner; Riemers was 53 votes short of one percent of that total.
Riemers requested an automatic recount under N.D.C.C. § 16.1-16-01(1)(a), which triggers a recount when "any individual failed to be nominated in a primary election by one percent or less of the highest vote cast for a candidate for the office sought."
The Secretary of State denied the request, reasoning primary ballots are organized by party columns and the recount provision should be applied only within a candidate's party; because Riemers was the only Libertarian candidate he could not be in a close intra-party contest.
Riemers sought a writ of mandamus from the North Dakota Supreme Court directing the Secretary to order an automatic recount.
The Court exercised original jurisdiction and granted the writ, ordering an automatic recount.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether N.D.C.C. § 16.1-16-01(1)(a) requires an automatic recount when a candidate falls within 1% of the highest vote for the office	Riemers: statute mandates a recount because he failed to be nominated by 1% or less of the highest vote cast for the office (53-vote difference)	Jaeger: statute should be read to compare candidates within the same party column; Riemers, as sole Libertarian candidate, was not in a close intra-party contest	Court: statute's plain language compares to "a candidate for the office sought" (no party limitation); Riemers entitled to an automatic recount
Whether mandamus is an appropriate remedy	Riemers: no plain, speedy, adequate legal remedy and statute imposes duty on Secretary to order recount	Jaeger: (implicit) procedural/interpretive dispute better resolved administratively; recount not required	Court: mandamus appropriate because duty is statutory, interpretation required, and no adequate alternative remedy given election timing

RECALLND v. Jaeger, 2010 ND 250, 792 N.W.2d 511 (recognizing limited circumstances for exercise of original jurisdiction)
Bolinske v. Jaeger, 2008 ND 180, 756 N.W.2d 336 (mandamus standards and original writ doctrine)
Kelsh v. Jaeger, 2002 ND 53, 641 N.W.2d 100 (publici juris requirement for original jurisdiction)
State ex rel. Kusler v. Sinner, 491 N.W.2d 382 (N.D. 1992) (original writs and public interest)
State v. Meador, 2010 ND 139, 785 N.W.2d 886 (statutory interpretation principles)
State v. Brown, 2009 ND 150, 771 N.W.2d 267 (statutory interpretation)
Estate of Christeson v. Gilstad, 2013 ND 50, 829 N.W.2d 453 (presumption that legislature meant what it said in amendments)
Meier v. N.D. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2012 ND 134, 818 N.W.2d 774 (presuming legislative amendments change law)
Scott v. N.D. Workers Comp. Bureau, 1998 ND 221, 587 N.W.2d 153 (statutory construction principles)
Doyle v. Sprynczynatyk, 2001 ND 8, 621 N.W.2d 353 (courts may not rewrite unambiguous statutes)
Adams Cnty. Record v. Greater N.D. Ass’n, 529 N.W.2d 830 (statutory duties may require judicial construction)
Fargo Ed. Ass’n v. Paulsen, 239 N.W.2d 842 (courts can construe statutes to determine public-official duties)