John A. (Pap) Moore v. Stacey W. Parker

Summary

The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed an election contest arising from the 2005 Democratic mayoral primary in Houston, Mississippi. The Court upheld the tribunal's determination that nine illegal or fraudulent votes had been cast for Moore and rejected challenges concerning jurisdiction, filing requirements, attorney certifications, inspection notice, timing, and evidence. The Court reversed the tribunal's order for a special primary runoff and held that a special election was required under Mississippi Code Annotated section 23-15-937.

Holdings

1. Mississippi Code section 23-15-933 bars appellate review of qualifying factual findings but does not bar review of the tribunal's legal conclusions. Because Moore raised questions of law, the Supreme Court had authority to decide the appeal.
2. Parker satisfied the statutory prerequisites for pursuing the election contest. His May 11 petition was properly filed with a member of the municipal Democratic executive committee, the later petition supplied sufficiently specific allegations, the ballot-box inspection followed adequate notice, the certifying attorneys were not disqualified merely because they worked for the same firm, and the judicial-review petition was filed forthwith under the circumstances.
3. The special tribunal did not exceed the scope of review because its findings concerning illegal and fraudulent absentee ballots were within, or germane and incidental to, the allegations in Parker's original contest petition.
4. Moore waived his challenge to the admissibility of David Douglas's hearsay testimony by failing to object when the testimony was offered before the tribunal.
5. The affidavits relied on in denying summary judgment related to Parker's allegations because they described illegal or fraudulent affidavit voting. The denial of summary judgment was therefore not erroneous on that ground.
6. The tribunal erred by ordering a special primary runoff election. Under Mississippi Code section 23-15-937, the appropriate remedy was for the Governor to call a special election for the office of mayor.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Supreme Court had authority to review the legal issues arising from the Special Election Contest Tribunal's order under Mississippi Code section 23-15-933.
2. Whether Parker satisfied the statutory jurisdictional prerequisites for contesting the primary election, including filing with the proper committee, stating sufficiently specific grounds, providing notice before inspecting ballot boxes, obtaining independent attorney certifications, and filing for judicial review forthwith.
3. Whether the special tribunal exceeded the scope of Parker's original contest petition.
4. Whether Moore waived his challenge to hearsay testimony by failing to object before the tribunal.
5. Whether affidavits relied on in denying summary judgment related to the allegations in Parker's election contest petition.
6. Whether the tribunal properly ordered a special primary runoff or was required to order a special election called by the Governor under Mississippi Code section 23-15-937.

Disposition

other