OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

Curley v. Lake County Board of Elections

Case Information

Date Filed / Ended: October 2, 2008 / October 31, 2008
State: Indiana
Issues: Voter Registration, Early Voting
Courts that Heard this Case: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana (Case 2:08-cv-00287); Indiana Supreme Court (Case 45A03-0810-CV-512); Indiana Court of Appeals (Case 45A03-0810-CV-512)

Issue:

Whether the Lake County Board of Election’s establishment of satellite offices for in-person absentee ballot voting violates Indiana state election law. The Board of Elections claims that it was obligated to take the challenged actions in order to comply with the Voting Rights Act.

Status:

NOTICE: The electronic dockets for the state courts in this case are not freely available to the public. Filings in this case are not being monitored on a daily basis. Select documents will be added to this page when possible.

Indiana Court of Appeals Documents

Indiana Supreme Court Documents (2nd Appeal)

Special Superior Court Proceedings

  • Order PDF (entered 10/22/08)

Indiana Supreme Court Documents (1st Appeal)

  • Order PDF (entered 10/14/08)

Superior Court Documents

U.S. District Court Documents

Related Links

Top 10 Election Issues

Commentary

Daniel P. Tokaji

A Poster Child for Dysfunctional Districting

Daniel P. Tokaji

 

Fifty years ago next month, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Baker v. Carr (1962), inaugurating the “reapportionment revolution” which led to the redrawing of legislative districts across the country. This milestone provides the opportunity to reflect not only on what has been accomplished, but also on what still needs to be done.

more commentary...

In the News

Daniel P. Tokaji

This week: Bama voting rights case in DC courtroom on Thursday

Professor Daniel Tokaji, a senior fellow at Election Law @ Moritz, was quoted by The Birmingham News in an article about a local county's crusade to end 47 years of federal government oversight of its election returns.

Shelby County is hoping a federal appeals court will agree that the county no longer needs the U.S. Justice Department to approve changes in the ways elections are conducted because the area has progressed from its discriminatory past. It is unclear whether the case would be the vehicle with which justices of the U.S. Supreme Court would review the constitutionality of Section 5.

"I am reasonably confident they're going to take up the question of Section 5 constitutionality within the next few years," Tokaji said. "It could be Shelby County, it could be South Carolina, or some other."

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

Edward B. Foley

Federal Court Finds Equal Protection Violation

In the Hunter case, involving provisional ballots in a local Ohio election from 2010, the federal district court has ordered that ballots must be counted if they are otherwise eligible if they were miscast because of poll worker error. 

more info & analysis...