(a) Any individual may file a petition in the manner provided in this section for the correction of any of the following errors, omissions, or wrongful acts which have occurred or are about to occur:
(1) an error or omission in the placement or printing of the name or description of any candidate or any question on any official ballot, including the placement of a candidate on the official ballot who is not eligible to hold the office for which the candidate has filed;
(2) any other error in preparing or printing any official ballot;
(3) failure of the chair or secretary of the proper committee of a major political party to execute or file a certificate of nomination;
(4) any wrongful act, omission, or error of any election judge, municipal clerk, county auditor, canvassing board or any of its members, the secretary of state, or any other individual charged with any duty concerning an election.
(b) The petition shall describe the error, omission, or wrongful act and the correction sought by the petitioner. The petition shall be filed with any judge of the supreme court in the case of an election for state or federal office or any judge of the district court in that county in the case of an election for county, municipal, or school district office. The petitioner shall serve a copy of the petition on the officer, board or individual charged with the error, omission, or wrongful act, on all candidates for the office in the case of an election for state, federal, county, municipal, or school district office, and on any other party as required by the court. Upon receipt of the petition the court shall immediately set a time for a hearing on the matter and order the officer, board or individual charged with the error, omission or wrongful act to correct the error or wrongful act or perform the duty or show cause for not doing so. In the case of a review of a candidate's eligibility to hold office, the court may order the candidate to appear and present sufficient evidence of the candidate's eligibility. The court shall issue its findings and a final order for appropriate relief as soon as possible after the hearing. Failure to obey the order is contempt of court.
(c) Any service required by this section on a candidate may be accomplished by electronic mail sent to the address the candidate provided on the candidate's affidavit of candidacy pursuant to section 204B.06, subdivision 1b, or by any other means permitted by law.
(d) If all candidates for an office and the officer, board, or individual charged with the error, omission, or wrongful act unanimously agree in writing:
(1) that an error, omission, or wrongful act occurred; and
(2) on the appropriate correction for the error, omission, or wrongful act,
then the officer, board, or individual charged with the error, omission, or wrongful act must correct the error in the manner agreed to without an order from the court. Such agreement must address, at a minimum, how the correction will take place and, if the correction involves a change to a ballot, how voters who have received or returned an incomplete ballot will be notified of the change and what, if any, steps voters who have returned an incorrect ballot can take to receive a corrected replacement ballot.
The officer, board, or individual must notify the secretary of state in writing of the error and proposed correction within one business day of receiving notification of the candidate's written agreement and must not distribute any ballots reflecting the proposed correction for two business days unless the secretary of state waives this notice period. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to preclude any person from filing a petition under this section alleging that the written agreement constitutes an error, omission, or wrongful act that requires correction by the court.
(e) Any candidate for an office who does not enter into an agreement under paragraph (d) and who does not prevail at any subsequent proceeding involving a petition filed under this section must pay the costs and disbursements of the prevailing party or parties unless the court determines that the candidate's position was substantially justified or such costs and disbursements would impose undue hardship or otherwise be inequitable.
(f) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, an official may correct any official ballot without order from the court if the ballot is not in compliance with sections 204B.35 to 204B.37 or any rules promulgated under sections 204B.35 to 204B.37.
Notes of Decisions
League of Women Voters Minnesota v. Ritchie, 819 N.W.2d 636 (Minn. 2012).
· cites it 25× “This action was brought under Minn. Stat. § 204B.44 (2010), seeking to correct an alleged error in the preparation of the ballot for the general election.”
Bicking v. City of Minneapolis, 891 N.W.2d 304 (Minn. 2017).
· cites it 18× “Bicking filed a petition in Hennepin County District Court, under Minn. Stat. § 204B.44 (2016), to challenge that decision.”
Zettler v. Ventura, 649 N.W.2d 846 (Minn. 2002).
· cites it 34× “44 (2000) in which the petitioner seeks relief from an alleged wrongful act by Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer, in her refusal to accept affidavits of candidacy for a judicial seat in the First Judicial District and her anticipated failure to place the seat on the ballot.”
Erlandson v. Kiffmeyer, 659 N.W.2d 724 (Minn. 2003).
· cites it 12× “Petitioners, three individuals, including the chair of the Democratic Farmer Labor Party, brought this action under Minn. Stat. § 204B.44 (2002) against the Minnesota Secretary of State and the Hennepin County Auditor/Treasurer.”
Winters v. Kiffmeyer, 650 N.W.2d 167 (Minn. 2002).
· cites it 14× “Winters seeks relief under Minn.Stat. § 204B.44 (2000) from an alleged wrongful act by the secretary of state for her failure to place Winters’ name on the ballot for the 2002 election as a candidate for the judicial seat currently held by the Honorable Donna Dixon of the Ninth…”
Carlson v. Ritchie, 830 N.W.2d 887 (Minn. 2013).
· cites it 23× “Carlson, the Independence Party candidate in the 2012 election for United States House of Representatives for Minnesota’s Fourth Congressional District, filed a petition pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 204B.44 (2012), seeking declaratory and injunctive relief.”
Schiff v. Griffin, 639 N.W.2d 56 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 13× “On July 31, 2001, appellants filed a petition for correction of ballot error and an application for order to show cause in district court, pursuant to the “errors and omissions” provision of Minn.Stat. § 204B.44 (2000). That provision authorizes the court, upon the petition of…”
Minnesota Voters All. & Kirk Stensrud v. Steve Simon, only in his Off. capacity as the Minnesota Sec'y of State, Joe Mansky, only in his Off. capacity as the Ramsey Cnty. Election Manager, Virginia Gelms, only in her Off. capacity as the Hennepin Cnty. Election Manager, & Election Judges John & Jane Doe, only in their Off. capacities as Election Judges, 885 N.W.2d 660 (Minn. 2016).
· cites it 31× “On June 15, 2016, the Minnesota Voters Alliance and Kirk Stensrud filed a petition under Minn.Stat. § 204B.44 (Supp.2015), asserting that respondents are not taking the necessary steps to ensure that those ineligible to vote are not permitted to vote.”
Martin v. Dicklich, 823 N.W.2d 336 (Minn. 2012).
· cites it 11× “Ken Martin and Erik Simonson filed a petition pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 204B.44 (2010). Petitioners seek an order requiring that respondents Donald Dicklich, the St.”
Coleman v. Ritchie, 762 N.W.2d 218 (Minn. 2009).
· cites it 24× “Petitioners Norm Coleman, Cullen Shee-han, and Cara Beth Lindell filed a petition and an amended petition pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 204B.44 (2008) concerning the November 4, 2008, election for United States Senator from the State of Minnesota.”
Coleman v. Ritchie, 758 N.W.2d 306 (Minn. 2008).
· cites it 22× “*307 ORDER Petitioners Norm Coleman, et al, have filed a petition and an amended petition under Minn.Stat. § 204B.44 (2006) concerning the election for United States Senator from Minnesota held on November 4, 2008, in which petitioners ask this court to (1) order county election…”
— Minn. Stat. § 204B.44(a) — 12 cases
Bicking v. City of Minneapolis, 891 N.W.2d 304 (Minn. 2017).
“Bicking filed a petition in Hennepin County District Court, under Minn. Stat. § 204B.44 (2016), to challenge that decision.”
League of Women Voters Minnesota v. Ritchie, 819 N.W.2d 636 (Minn. 2012).
“This action was brought under Minn. Stat. § 204B.44 (2010), seeking to correct an alleged error in the preparation of the ballot for the general election.”
Zettler v. Ventura, 649 N.W.2d 846 (Minn. 2002).
“44 (2000) in which the petitioner seeks relief from an alleged wrongful act by Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer, in her refusal to accept affidavits of candidacy for a judicial seat in the First Judicial District and her anticipated failure to place the seat on the ballot.”
— Minn. Stat. § 204B.44(a)(1) — 4 cases
Bicking v. City of Minneapolis, 891 N.W.2d 304 (Minn. 2017).
“Bicking filed a petition in Hennepin County District Court, under Minn. Stat. § 204B.44 (2016), to challenge that decision.”
— Minn. Stat. § 204B.44(a)(4) — 7 cases
Minnesota Voters All. & Kirk Stensrud v. Steve Simon, only in his Off. capacity as the Minnesota Sec'y of State, Joe Mansky, only in his Off. capacity as the Ramsey Cnty. Election Manager, Virginia Gelms, only in her Off. capacity as the Hennepin Cnty. Election Manager, & Election Judges John & Jane Doe, only in their Off. capacities as Election Judges, 885 N.W.2d 660 (Minn. 2016).
“On June 15, 2016, the Minnesota Voters Alliance and Kirk Stensrud filed a petition under Minn.Stat. § 204B.44 (Supp.2015), asserting that respondents are not taking the necessary steps to ensure that those ineligible to vote are not permitted to vote.”
— Minn. Stat. § 204B.44(b) — 6 cases
Minnesota Voters All. & Kirk Stensrud v. Steve Simon, only in his Off. capacity as the Minnesota Sec'y of State, Joe Mansky, only in his Off. capacity as the Ramsey Cnty. Election Manager, Virginia Gelms, only in her Off. capacity as the Hennepin Cnty. Election Manager, & Election Judges John & Jane Doe, only in their Off. capacities as Election Judges, 885 N.W.2d 660 (Minn. 2016).
“On June 15, 2016, the Minnesota Voters Alliance and Kirk Stensrud filed a petition under Minn.Stat. § 204B.44 (Supp.2015), asserting that respondents are not taking the necessary steps to ensure that those ineligible to vote are not permitted to vote.”
— Minn. Stat. § 204B.44(c) — 1 case
— Minn. Stat. § 204B.44(d) — 12 cases
Zettler v. Ventura, 649 N.W.2d 846 (Minn. 2002).
“44 (2000) in which the petitioner seeks relief from an alleged wrongful act by Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer, in her refusal to accept affidavits of candidacy for a judicial seat in the First Judicial District and her anticipated failure to place the seat on the ballot.”
Minnesota Voters All. & Kirk Stensrud v. Steve Simon, only in his Off. capacity as the Minnesota Sec'y of State, Joe Mansky, only in his Off. capacity as the Ramsey Cnty. Election Manager, Virginia Gelms, only in her Off. capacity as the Hennepin Cnty. Election Manager, & Election Judges John & Jane Doe, only in their Off. capacities as Election Judges, 885 N.W.2d 660 (Minn. 2016).
“On June 15, 2016, the Minnesota Voters Alliance and Kirk Stensrud filed a petition under Minn.Stat. § 204B.44 (Supp.2015), asserting that respondents are not taking the necessary steps to ensure that those ineligible to vote are not permitted to vote.”
Winters v. Kiffmeyer, 650 N.W.2d 167 (Minn. 2002).
“Winters seeks relief under Minn.Stat. § 204B.44 (2000) from an alleged wrongful act by the secretary of state for her failure to place Winters’ name on the ballot for the 2002 election as a candidate for the judicial seat currently held by the Honorable Donna Dixon of the Ninth…”
Carlson v. Ritchie, 830 N.W.2d 887 (Minn. 2013).
“Carlson, the Independence Party candidate in the 2012 election for United States House of Representatives for Minnesota’s Fourth Congressional District, filed a petition pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 204B.44 (2012), seeking declaratory and injunctive relief.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.