Stickney v. Town of Salem

• Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: LAMPRON
• Citation: Stickney v. Town of Salem, 96 N.H. 500, 78 A.2d 921 (N.H. 1951)
• Decision Date: 06 March 1951
• Parties: STICKNEY et al. v. TOWN OF SALEM et al.

Page 921

78 A.2d 921

96 N.H. 500

STICKNEY et al. v. TOWN OF SALEM et al.

Supreme Court of New Hampshire.

March 6, 1951.

Leonard & Leonard, Albert Terrien and Richard M. Ryan, Nashua, for the plaintiffs.

John W. Perkins and Everett P. Holland, Exeter, for the defendants.

LAMPRON, Justice.

It is true that the prayer of plaintiffs' petition seeks to have all business done and all votes taken at the meeting in question rejected and declared null and void in addition to having the election then held declared illegal. However because of the allegations therein made and of the specifications filed in clarification thereof their petition can fairly and properly be interpreted as being merely a proceeding to determine the right to hold office of the persons elected at said annual meeting. In that case the petition was properly dismissed because there is an adequate remedy at law to accomplish this purpose, viz.: quo warranto. Stearns v. O'Dowd, 78 N.H. 358, 101 A. 31; Attorney General v. Gates, 80 N.H. 280, 116 A. 443; Attorney General ex rel. Laighton v. Caldwell, 92 N.H. 216, 29 A.2d 124.

The plaintiffs maintain, however, that the matter in issue is the proper method of conducting the election in question and not the right of any individual to hold a public office. They contend that there is no special tribunal created by statute to which they can resort for an adjudication of the validity of this election, their only remedy being a resort to the general equitable jurisdiction. A short answer to this contention is that there is no inherent power in courts of equity to determine the validity of an election because equity very seldom deals with political matters. Fortin v. Sullivan, 96 N.H. 320, 75 A.2d 785; Soper v. Jones, 171 Md. 643, 187 A. 833; Johnson v. Stevenson, 5 Cir., 170 F.2d 108, certiorari denied 336 U.S. 904, 69 S.Ct. 491, 93 L.Ed. 1069; Evans v. Charles, W.Va.1949, 56 S.E.2d 880; 29 C.J.S., Elections, § 246, page 355; 18 Am.Jur. 359, 387; 4 Pom., Eq.Jur., 4th ed., 4068, 4074. A candidate can secure redress from irregularities at an election by a recount under R.L. c. 34, §§ 96-101 as well as by quo warranto through the Attorney General. Meehan v. Bachelder, 73 N.H. 113, 59 A. 620. He along with the general public is protected from the official misconduct of any election official by R.L. c. 34, § 86.

Taking the allegations made by the plaintiffs as true their petition did not entitle them to the relief sought. The order must therefore...