To Contest Municipal Election Results, Claimant Must Have ‘Sustained’ Direct Injury that Differentiates Him or Her from Other Members of Community

John J. Babiarz v. Town of Grafton
John J. Babiarz v. Town of Grafton
No. 2006-542
Friday, July 20, 2007

The plaintiff is a taxpayer, voter and town meeting participant in the Town of Grafton. At the 2006 annual town meeting, errors occurred in the counting of ballots for contested races and warrant articles. Following a recount, the official tally was declared. The Plaintiff was dissatisfied with the conduct of the recount, and sought injunctive relief in the superior court to require an additional recount procedure and to prevent certain town officials from taking the oath of office.

The superior court refused the request for relief, finding that the Plaintiff lacked the requisite legal standing to seek such relief. The Plaintiff appealed the denial of his request to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court decision. The language of the recount statute, RSA 669:35, grants a right of appeal to the Superior Court to “any person aggrieved by a ruling of the board of recount.” The Court refused to grant this status to all taxpayers, or even all voters, finding that the legislature’s use of the word “aggrieved” indicated an intent that the claimant must show a special injury above and beyond that suffered by all members of the public.

The Court took special note of its decisions in the areas of land use, land use enforcement, and tax abatements that are consistent with this holding that standing will not be afforded to all members of the public, but instead only to those who can describe a specific injury arising out of the underlying decision.