ROY L. HARDEMON, ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
DAVID C. LEAHY, AS SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS FOR METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, ET AL., APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A candidate for Dade County Commissioner who notified the supervisor of elections that he would not accept the office attempted to withdraw that notification the next day. The court held that Florida's election statute mandatorily excludes candidates who file such notifications and makes no provision for withdrawal, so the candidate's name could not be placed on the ballot.
A candidate whose name has been excluded from the ballot pursuant to a non-acceptance notification cannot be placed back on the ballot through a change of mind, as Florida Statutes section 101.253(1) mandatorily requires exclusion and makes no provision or exception for withdrawal of the notification.
[1] A candidate's name shall not be printed on the ballot if the candidate has notified the supervisor of elections in writing, under oath, on or before the 42nd day before t…
[2] A supervisor of elections may, in their discretion and with the approval of the Department of State, allow a candidate to withdraw a prior notification of non-acceptance…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“section 101.253(1), which is specifically entitled 'When names not to be printed on ballot,' mandatorily requires, see S.R. v. State, 346 So. 2d 1018 (Fla.1977), the exclusion of a candidate who has filed the notification in question”
Establishes the mandatory nature of the statute's requirement to exclude candidates who file non-acceptance notifications
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRoy Hardemon qualified as a candidate for Dade County Commissioner. After the qualifying period expired, he notified the supervisor of elections in wr…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Mandatory Statutory Language cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
After Hardemon had qualified as a candidate for Dade County Commissioner and the qualifying period had expired, he notified the supervisor of elections, as provided by section 101.253(1), Florida Statutes (1993),1 that he would not accept the office if elected. The day after, he attempted to withdraw the non-acceptance. The trial court, however, held that section 101.253(1), which is specifically entitled ‘When names not to be printed on ballot,” mandatorily requires, see S.R. v. State, 346 So. 2d 1018 (Fla.1977), the exclusion of a candidate who has filed the notification in question. Because the statute makes no provision or exception for a change of mind, we agree that, under these circumstances, Hardemon’s name may not be placed on the ballot.2 See Battaglia v. Adams, 164 So. 2d 195 (Fla.1964).
Affirmed.
. The provision states:
101.253 When names not to be printed on ballot.—
(1) No candidate’s name, which candidate is required to qualify with a supervisor of elections for any primary or general election, shall be printed on the ballot if such candidate has notified the supervisor of elections in writing, under oath, on or before the 42nd day before the election that he will not accept the nomination or office for which he filed -qualification papers. The supervisor of elections may, in his discretion with the approval of the Department of State, allow such a candidate to withdraw after the 42nd day before an election, upon receipt of written notice, sworn to under oath, that he will not accept the nomination or office for which he qualified.
. Contrary to the appellant's position, section 101.253(3), Florida Statutes (1993) does not afford him a right to reentry into the race.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Abreau v. Cobb, 670 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)…The Fifth Circuit further stated that “the presence or absence of a requirement that reasons be stated on the face of a recall petition reflects the nature of the political system in operation.” Id. The trial court’s reliance on Hardemon v. Leahy, 642 So. 2d 28 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994), is misplaced. Hardemon did not involve a Charter provision founded on specific constitutional grant of power and did not discuss the Charter. The trial court additionally erred in holding that § 7.02(7) of Art. 7 of the Dade Cou…
Authorities Cited
- In the Interest of S. R. v. State, 346 So. 2d 1018 (Fla. 1977)
- Battaglia v. Adams, 164 So. 2d 195 (Fla. 1964)