Careers

Experiences

Industries

Offices

Our Firm

Pages

Our People

Updates

Practices

Warner Norcross + Judd LLP is a corporate law firm with over 230 attorneys serving clients in nine offices throughout Michigan. Among the largest law firms in Michigan, Warner works in virtually all areas of business law.

Michigan Law Firm - Warner Norcross + Judd LLP

Michigan election law requires a candidate to file an affidavit of identity containing several pieces of information, including the precinct number where the candidate is registered. Because Michigan election law prohibits an officer from certifying a candidate who does not comply with the affidavit of identity requirements, an elector may vindicate the public’s right under this statute by requiring strict adherence to these statutory duties, the Court of Appeals held in <em><a href="http://publicdocs.courts.mi.gov:81/OPINIONS/FINAL/COA/20160617_C333225_53_333225.OPN.PDF" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Berry v. Garrett</a></em>, No. 333225.

contentpilot/introduction

Carl Berry is a registered voter in Plymouth Township.&nbsp; Donald F. Schnettler and Kurt L. Heise sought the positions of township trustee and township supervisor, respectively; however, in their affidavits of identity, neither Schnettler nor Heise provided a precinct number as required by MCL 168.558.&nbsp; Berry filed a writ of mandamus alleging that the defendants, the township clerk and election commissioner, failed to comply with the requirements set forth in MCL 168.558 by placing Schnettler and Heise’s names on the ballot. &nbsp;The trial court denied Berry’s writ of mandamus because Berry purportedly failed to establish that he had a clear legal right to the performance of these statutory duties.&nbsp;

core/paragraph

The Court of Appeals held that based on the plain language of MCL 168.558, the Wayne County defendants had a legal duty not to certify a candidate that had failed to comply with the affidavit of identity requirements.&nbsp; Additionally, the court determined that Berry had a clear legal right to performance of these statutory duties.&nbsp; In so holding, the Court of Appeals relied on <em>Martin v Secretary of State</em>, 482 Mich 956 (2008). &nbsp;Though the Court of Appeals would normally remand such a case to the trial court, given the exigencies of the election that would render the case moot, the court used its power under MCR 7.216(A)(7) to render a decision on the merits.

Disclaimer: Warner represented the prevailing party in this appeal.

Partner

Matthew T. “Matt” Nelson

Labor and Employment

COA: Voters have a legal right to enforce state election law requirements

Warner Norcross + Judd LLP is responsible for the contents of our advertising and this website. Please read our full <a href="/privacy-policy/" aria-label="see privacy policy">privacy policy</a> available on our website. If you have any questions or comments about our website or our Privacy Policy please contact us at <a href="mailto:info@wnj.com">info@wnj.com</a> or 616.752.2000. 

COA: Voters have a legal right to enforce state election law requirements

professionals