William Thomas McFarland v. Michael S. Pemberton et al.

Summary

The Tennessee Supreme Court held that a county election commission had authority to conduct a quasi-judicial hearing and determine whether a judicial candidate satisfied the constitutional residency requirement. The court further held that the commission's decision was a final administrative decision reviewable by common-law writ of certiorari, subject to a 60-day filing period. Because the plaintiff filed his election contest after that period expired, the court affirmed dismissal as untimely.

Holdings

1. A county election commission has authority, by necessary implication from its statutory duty to ensure that only qualified candidates appear on the ballot, to conduct a quasi-judicial hearing and make a factual determination regarding a candidate's residency qualification.
2. The Election Commission's factual determination of Pemberton's residency and resulting certification of him as a candidate were quasi-judicial administrative actions, not merely ministerial or legislative acts.
3. The Election Commission's certification decision was a final administrative order or judgment reviewable by common-law writ of certiorari under Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-9-101.
4. McFarland was an aggrieved person with standing under section 27-9-101 because he was Pemberton's opposing candidate and had actual notice of the election commission proceedings.
5. Although styled as an election contest, McFarland's complaint was substantively a request for judicial review of the Election Commission's residency decision and was therefore subject to the sixty-day limitations period for certiorari.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the county election commission had authority under Tennessee's Election Code, by necessary implication, to conduct a quasi-judicial hearing and determine a candidate's factual residency qualification.
2. Whether the election commission's determination that the candidate satisfied the residency requirement was a quasi-judicial final administrative decision subject to review by common-law writ of certiorari.
3. Whether McFarland was an aggrieved person with standing to seek review under Tennessee Code Annotated sections 27-9-101 and 27-9-102 despite not participating in the election commission hearing.
4. Whether an election contest pleading challenging the candidate's residency was, in substance, a petition for writ of certiorari subject to the sixty-day limitations period.

Disposition

affirmed