CASE STUDIES IN EMERGENCY ELECTION LITIGATION

Federal Judicial Center 11/3/2023 1

A Suit to Prevent a Legislature 

from Voiding a Close Election 

Ford v. Beavers 

(Bernice B. Donald, W.D. Tenn. 2:06-cv-2031) 

On the day before a state senate was expected to void a senator’s election to the senate by a very close special election because of concerns 

that some votes were fraudulent, a federal district judge enjoined 

senate action on the matter pending a hearing in a federal case filed 

by the newly elected senator and three voters who voted for her. Following a hearing, the judge issued a declaratory judgment in the 

plaintiffs’ favor. The senate subsequently removed the senator from 

office, but at the end of the session the judge enjoined the naming of 

an interim replacement. The senator won the seat again at the next 

election, an appeal was deemed moot, and the judge awarded the 

plaintiffs $117,263 in attorney fees, costs, and expenses. 

Subject: Voting irregularities. Topics: Election errors; attorney 

fees. 

State Senator Ophelia Ford and three voters who voted for her in a September 

15, 2004, special election filed a federal complaint in the Western District of 

Tennessee on January 18, 2006, to challenge a senate vote scheduled for the 

following day on whether her election should be voided.1 

District 29 Democratic Senator Ford won the election by thirteen votes to 

fill a vacancy created when John Ford, her brother, resigned in advance of his 

successful federal prosecution for bribery.2 Ophelia Ford’s Republican challenger in the election pursued an election contest with the senate, which voted 

on January 17, 2006, to have a final vote on January 19 on whether the election 

should be voided because some ballots were of questionable validity.3 In the 

federal complaint, the plaintiffs named as defendants the other thirty-two senators, including Tennessee’s lieutenant governor, and Ford’s challenger in the 

election.4 The challenger was dismissed as a defendant by agreement on January 27.5

1. Complaint, Ford v. Beavers, No. 2:06-cv-2031 (W.D. Tenn. Jan. 18, 2006), D.E. 1 [hereinafter Ford Complaint]; Ford v. Wilder, 469 F.3d 500, 501–02 (6th Cir. 2006); see Second 

Amended Complaint, Ford, No. 2:06-cv-2031 (W.D. Tenn. Jan. 27, 2006), D.E. 26; Amended 

Complaint, id. (Jan. 23, 2006), D.E. 6. 

2. Ford, 469 F.3d at 501–02; see Richard Locker, Ford Resigns, Memphis Com. App., May 

29, 2005, at A1; Longtime Tennessee State Senator Resigns After Bribery Sting, N.Y. Times, May 

29, 2005, at 22. 

3. Ford, 469 F.3d at 502; see Richard Locker, Senate Acts to Oust Ford, Memphis Com. 

App., Jan. 18, 2006, at A1. 

4. Ford Complaint, supra note 1. 

5. Consent Order, Ford, No. 2:06-cv-2031 (W.D. Tenn. Jan. 27, 2006), D.E. 22. 
A Suit to Prevent a Legislature from Voiding a Close Election 

2 Federal Judicial Center 11/3/2023 

On the day that the complaint was filed, following a fifty-minute evening 

telephone conference with the parties, Judge Bernice B. Donald issued a temporary restraining order against further senate action on the 2004 special election.6

 She scheduled a hearing for January 25.7

According to the Commercial Appeal, “The crowded courtroom was 

packed with Ford’s supporters and political opponents—as well as 15 senators—who listened to a day’s worth of mostly technical testimony on election 

laws and procedures. Because the courtroom was so crowded, 14 senators sat 

in the jury box.”8

On February 1, Judge Donald granted the plaintiffs a declaratory judgment 

that the contemplated senate action violated the plaintiffs’ equal-protection 

and due-process rights, as well as voting rights under Tennessee’s constitution.9

 “[B]ecause the Tennessee Senate has failed to adopt and articulate a consistent standard that meets the uniformity requirement of the Equal Protection Clause, the Court finds that disenfranchisement of District 29 voters by 

excluding their votes and voiding the election would raise grave equal protection concerns.”10 Moreover, “because the Senate’s actions implicate the fundamental right to vote[,] the constituents of Senate District 29 are entitled to adequate notice and opportunity to be heard before any prospective disenfranchisement.”11 And under Tennessee’s constitution, “Defendants are required 

to conduct election contests by the same standards utilized in each of the 

State’s districts.”12

6. Temporary Restraining Order, id. (Jan. 18, 2006), D.E. 2; Docket Sheet, id. (Jan. 18, 

2006) [hereinafter Ford Docket Sheet] (minutes, D.E. 4); Ford, 469 F.3d at 502; see Chris Conley, Both Parties Favored Donald, Memphis Com. App., Feb. 1, 2006, at B1 (reporting also, 

“When a clerk used a Rolodex-type gadget to spin cards with the names of the district’s four 

judges on them, it stopped at U.S. Dist. Judge Bernice Donald.”); Bonna de la Cruz, Judge 

Gives Ford Week’s Reprieve, Nashville Tennessean, Jan. 19, 2006, at 1B; Richard Locker, Judge 

Halts Senate Vote on Ford, Memphis Com. App., Jan. 19, 2006, at A1. 

Judge Donald was elevated to the court of appeals on September 8, 2011, and she retired 

on January 20, 2023. Federal Judicial Center Biographical Directory of Article III Federal 

Judges, www.fjc.gov/history/judges. 

7. Ford Docket Sheet, supra note 6 (D.E. 4); see id. (minutes, D.E. 25); Ford, 469 F.3d at 

502; see also Bonna de la Cruz, 3 Lawmakers Get Court Summons in Ford Case, Nashville Tennessean, Jan. 24, 2006, at 4B; Richard Locker, Ford’s Court Hearing Today, Memphis Com. 

App., Jan. 25, 2006, at A1. 

8. Chris Conley, No Rush to Judgment, Memphis Com. App., Jan. 26, 2006, at A1; see

Bonna de la Cruz, Senate Ouster of Ford on Hold at Least a Week, Nashville Tennessean, Jan. 

26, 2006, at 1A (“Nearly half the Senate—13 Republicans and two Democrats—attended the 

daylong hearing at the Clifford Davis Federal Building in Memphis.”). 

9. Opinion, Ford, No. 2:06-cv-2031 (W.D. Tenn. Feb. 1, 2006), D.E. 30 [hereinafter Ford

Declaratory-Judgment Opinion]; Ford, 469 F.3d at 501–02. 

10. Ford Declaratory-Judgment Opinion, supra note 9, at 19. 

11. Id. at 23. 

12. Id. at 27. 
A Suit to Prevent a Legislature from Voiding a Close Election 

Federal Judicial Center 11/3/2023 3

On April 19, the senate removed Senator Ford from office.13 On the day 

before, Judge Donald determined that “the record [was] not so compelling that 

[the] Court should step in.”14 On April 25, the plaintiffs sought to void the 

senate’s action with a third amended complaint filed as a new case.15 At a May 

16 hearing, observing that the legislative session was concluding, Judge Donald granted a preliminary injunction against the appointment of an interim 

replacement for Senator Ford.16

Senator Ford won her seat back on November 7.17

On November 22, the court of appeals dismissed as moot an appeal from 

the declaratory judgment.18

The second case was dismissed by consent on July 16, 2007.19 On October 

24, 2008, Judge Donald awarded the plaintiffs $117,263 in attorney fees, costs, 

and expenses.20

On April 27, 2007, John Ford was convicted of bribery by a Western District of Tennessee jury.21 Judge J. Daniel Breen sentenced him to five years and 

13. Ford, 469 F.3d at 503; see Theo Emery, Senate Voids Election, N.Y. Times, Apr. 20, 

2006, at A18; Richard Locker, Senate Ousts Ford, Memphis Com. App., Apr. 20, 2006, at A1; 

Travis Loller, Election Won by Memphis Democrat “Incurably Uncertain,” Nashville Tennessean, Apr. 20, 2006, at 1A. 

14. Ford Docket Sheet, supra note 6 (minutes, D.E. 53); see Ford, 469 F.3d at 503; see also

Lawrence Buser, Senate Gets Nod for Ford Vote Today, Memphis Com. App., Apr. 19, 2006, 

at A1. 

15. Complaint, Ford v. Wilder, No. 2:06-cv-2241 (W.D. Tenn. Apr. 25, 2006), D.E. 1; Ford, 

469 F.3d at 503 & n.5; see Amended Complaint, Ford, No. 2:06-cv-2241 (W.D. Tenn. May 16, 

2006), D.E. 12; Injunction Motion, id. (Apr. 26, 2006), D.E. 4; see also Chris Conley, Ford Sues 

Senate to Regain Her Seat, Memphis Com. App., Apr. 26, 2006, at A1; Ousted Senator Sues, 

N.Y. Times, Apr. 27, 2006, at A23. 

16. Preliminary Injunction, Ford, No. 2:06-cv-2241 (W.D. Tenn. filed May 30, 2006), D.E. 

17; Docket Sheet, id. (Apr. 25, 2006) (D.E. 15, 17); Ford, 469 F.3d at 503; see Chris Conley, 

Judge Grants Ford’s Request, Memphis Com. App., May 17, 2006, at A1. 

17. Ford, 469 F.3d at 503 & n.4. 

18. Id. at 507. 

One judge would have also vacated the declaratory judgment. Id. at 507–08 (Circuit Judge 

John M. Rogers, concurring and dissenting). 

19. Consent Dismissal, Ford, No. 2:06-cv-2241 (W.D. Tenn. July 16, 2007), D.E. 47; see

Federal Judge Tosses Lawsuit Over Ford’s Expulsion, Knoxville News-Sentinel, July 17, 2007, 

at 8. 

20. Opinion, Ford v. Beavers, No. 2:06-cr-2031 (W.D. Tenn. Oct. 24, 2008), D.E. 73, 2006 

WL 4724371; see Ford, 469 F.3d at 501, 507 (remanding for an award of attorney fees); see also

Richard Locker, Judge Orders Ford’s Bill Paid, Memphis Com. App., Oct. 31, 2008, at B4.

21. Jury Verdict, United States v. Ford, No. 2:05-cv-20201 (W.D. Tenn. Apr. 27, 2007), 

D.E. 107; see Jury Instructions at 27, id. (filed May 2, 2007), D.E. 110; see also United States v. 

Ford, 639 F.3d 718, 719 (6th Cir. 2011); Lawrence Buser, Ford Denied Appeal of 51⁄2-Year Sentence, Memphis Com. App., Aug. 27, 2009, at B1; Ex-Tennessee Lawmaker Is Guilty of Bribery, 

N.Y. Times, Apr. 28, 2007, at A14; Marc Perrusquia, John Ford Verdict—CONVICTED, Memphis Com. App., Apr. 28, 2007, at A1; USA vs. John Ford, Memphis Com. App., Apr. 8, 2007, 

at A4. 
A Suit to Prevent a Legislature from Voiding a Close Election 

4 Federal Judicial Center 11/3/2023 

six months.22 On April 14, 2011, the court of appeals reversed a July 18, 2008, 

Middle District conviction for failure to disclose financial interests.23

22. Redacted Amended Judgment, Ford, No. 2:05-cr-20201 (W.D. Tenn. Mar. 4, 2008), 

D.E. 172, aff’d, 344 F. App’x 167 (6th Cir. 2009); see Ex-Lawmaker Sentenced, N.Y. Times, 

Aug. 29, 2007, at A17; see also www.bop.gov (noting a release date of February 8, 2013, reg. 

no. 20286-076); Marc Perrusquia, John Ford Enters Memphis Halfway House, Memphis Com. 

App., Aug. 21, 2012, at 1. 

23. Ford, 639 F.3d 718 (finding no federal jurisdiction over disclosure obligations); see

Judgment, United States v. Ford, No. 3:06-cr-235 (M.D. Tenn. Sept. 30, 2008), D.E. 268 (noting a sentence of fourteen years); Jury Verdict, id. (July 18, 2008), D.E. 245; see also Lawrence 

Buser, Ruling Key to Freedom for Ford, Memphis Com. App., Apr. 15, 2011, at A1; Ex-Lawmaker Guilty, N.Y. Times, July 19, 2008, at A13; New Indictment Against Former State Senator, 

N.Y. Times, Dec. 19, 2006, at A28.