Petition of Lafreniere
| Decision Date | 24 January 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 1992,1992 |
| Citation | 227 A.2d 301,126 Vt. 204 |
| Court | Vermont Supreme Court |
| Parties | Petition of Bertha LA FRENIERE. |
Peter E. Piche, Burlington, for petitioner.
Thomas Salmon, Bellows Falls, for Neal C. Lunnie, petitionee.
Before HOLDEN, C. J., and SHANGRAW, BARNEY, SMITH and KEYSER, JJ.
The petitioner challenges the right of Neal C. Lunnie to represent District No. 58 in the General Assembly now in session. The petition was filed in this court several days after the petitionee had been sworn as the legal representative for the district in question.
The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus, or in the alternative, prohibition or certiorari to test the legality of Mr. Lunnie's election. Prior to the present proceeding the petitioner invoked subsection one of 17 V.S.A. § 1361. The full text of that statute reads:
A candidate for the office of representative to the general assembly may contest the election of another candidate for the same office by notifying the other candidate in writing by registered mail or certified mail and filing with the county clerk within ten days after the election a petition setting forth under oath the facts and the grounds upon which he contests the election.
(1) When the petitioner states that he is informed and believes that a mistake or fraud has been committed in the counting or return of the votes for such office and requests a recount of such votes:
(A) The clerk shall notify the judge of the county court having jurisdiction in the representative district who shall direct a recount of the votes and order the town clerk in the representative district to deliver to the county clerk the votes cast for such office and make other appropriate orders in the premises.
(B) The judge shall appoint three disinterested persons from an adjoining town or towns who shall be sworn for the proper performance of their duties to count the votes in the presence of the county clerk. Such disinterested persons shall be paid from town funds of the town in which the vote is contested the sum of $10.00 each per day plus their reasonable and necessary expenses.
(C) Upon completion of the recount, the judge shall issue a proper certificate of election of the candidate receiving the largest number of votes.
(2) When the petitioner states facts or grounds questioning the eligibility of the other candidate or the legality of the election, he shall request an investigation of the facts for submission to the next general assembly....
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Concord Gen. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Gritman
-
Board of Trustees of Kellogg-Hubbard Library, Inc. v. Labor Relations Bd., KELLOGG-HUBBARD
...relief in nature of certiorari is not available where issues could have been raised by direct appeal); In re LaFreniere, 126 Vt. 204, 206, 227 A.2d 301, 302 (1967) (extraordinary remedies of mandamus, prohibition and certiorari are not available to litigant who failed to resort to statutory......
-
Town of Barnet v. New England Power Co., 95-71
...of certiorari when a regular means of appeal exists. A recent denial of a petition for such a writ occurred in Petition of LaFreneire, 126 Vt. 204, 206, 227 A.2d 301 (1967), where the petitioner sought to test the legality of the election of a representative to the assembly. The petition wa......
-
New England Tel. & Tel. Co., In re
...the orders of the board, under 3 V.S.A. § 815 and 30 V.S.A. § 12, certiorari is an inappropriate form of relief. Petition of LaFreniere, 126 Vt. 204, 206, 227 A.2d 301 (1967). As that case points out the same disability attaches to petitions in the nature of mandamus. However, mandamus bein......