Summary
The Arkansas Supreme Court dismissed Floyd E. Gray’s appeal as moot. Gray challenged Mary F. Thomas-Barnes’s eligibility for the Dermott mayoral election after the general election and sought to be placed in the runoff; the court held that the election had occurred and that Gray had not addressed any exception to mootness. A concurrence would have dismissed on the alternative ground that the circuit court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over the untimely preelection challenge.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Gray's appeal from dismissal of his challenge to Thomas-Barnes's eligibility was moot after the runoff election had occurred and Hampton had been elected and was serving as mayor.
- Whether Gray's eligibility challenge filed after the November 4 general election could be treated as a preelection challenge under Arkansas Code Annotated section 7-5-207(b), rather than as a postelection contest under section 7-5-801.
- Whether the Supreme Court should address the circuit court's subject-matter-jurisdiction ruling when Gray failed to develop an argument concerning mootness and its exceptions.
Holdings
- The appeal was moot because the election had been held and the requested injunctive and declaratory relief could no longer have a practical legal effect.
- The court declined to address Gray's jurisdictional argument because Gray failed to develop the mootness issue or show that an exception to mootness applied.
- The Supreme Court of Arkansas had appellate jurisdiction because the appeal pertained to elections and election procedures under Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 1-2(a)(4) (2015).
Key quotations
““[I]n a long line of cases, we have observed that the issue of a candidate’s eligibility under section 7-5-207(b) becomes moot once the election takes place.”” (2015 Ark. 426, at 4)
“Thus, we dismiss Gray’s appeal as moot.” (2015 Ark. 426, at 5)
Factual background
Gray and three other independent candidates competed in the November 4, 2014 general election for mayor of Dermott, Arkansas. Thomas-Barnes and Hampton advanced to a November 25 runoff after no candidate received a majority, while Gray finished third. One day before the runoff, Gray challenged Thomas-Barnes's eligibility, alleging that she was a convicted felon and seeking to have himself placed on the runoff ballot. The runoff occurred, Hampton won, and he was serving as mayor when the Supreme Court considered the appeal.
Procedural history
Gray filed a complaint one day before the November 25, 2014 mayoral runoff election, seeking to invalidate Thomas-Barnes's eligibility, place Gray on the runoff ballot, and prevent tabulation and certification of the runoff results. The circuit court initially issued an emergency ex parte injunction permitting the election to proceed but barring tabulation and certification, then dissolved the injunction and dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction. After the circuit court's dismissal was memorialized in a January 9, 2015 order and Gray's motion for new trial was deemed denied, Gray appealed. By the time of appellate review, Hampton had been elected and was serving as mayor.