Opinion ID: 835999
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: overview of appeal remedy provided by ors 246.910

Text: ORS 246.910 provides: (1) A person adversely affected by any act or failure to act by the Secretary of State, a county clerk, a city elections officer or any other county, city or district official under any election law, or by any order, rule, directive or instruction made by the Secretary of State, a county clerk, a city elections officer or any other county, city or district official under any election law, may appeal therefrom to the circuit court for the county in which the act or failure to act occurred or in which the order, rule, directive or instruction was made. (2) Any party to the appeal proceedings in the circuit court under subsection (1) of this section may appeal from the decision of the circuit court to the Court of Appeals. (3) The circuit courts and Court of Appeals, in their discretion, may give such precedence on their dockets to appeals under this section as the circumstances may require. (4) The remedy provided in this section is cumulative and does not exclude any other remedy against any act or failure to act by the Secretary of State, a county clerk, a city elections officer or any other county, city or district official under any election law or against any order, rule, directive or instruction made by the Secretary of State, a county clerk, a city elections officer or any other county, city or district official under any election law. That statute provides a nonexclusive remedy, in the form of an appeal to the circuit court, for virtually any conduct by the Secretary of State, and an array of local election officials, that falls short of the requirements of Oregon election law or any official decision relating to elections made pursuant to delegated authority. Subsection (1) of the statute identifies two broad categories of conduct by election officials that an appeal may challenge. The first category is any act or failure to act by the Secretary of State, a county clerk, a city elections officer or any other county, city or district official under any election law   . The second category is any order, rule, directive or instruction made by the Secretary of State, a county clerk, a city elections officer or any other county, city or district official under any election law   . Subsection (1) provides that, to bring an appeal, a plaintiff must be adversely affected by conduct that falls into either one or both of the categories described above. In this proceeding, all individual plaintiffs allege that they are either registered voters or electors. Therefore, in challenging the Secretary of State's conduct in advancing Measure 7 to a public vote and in canvassing the ballots after the election on November 7, 2000, the individual plaintiffs satisfy the criterion that, the majority agrees, confers standing to sue under ORS 246.910(1). 334 Or. at 654-55 n. 9, 56 P.3d at 899 n. 9 (citing Ellis v. Roberts, 302 Or. 6, 10-11, 725 P.2d 886 (1986)). I discuss the individual plaintiffs' claims and the correct legal interpretation of the statute in greater detail later in this opinion. The appeal that ORS 246.910(1) provides is a significant remedy. By filing an appeal under that statute, a registered voter can focus prompt judicial scrutiny on the conduct of election officials to make certain that every action or inaction of those officials complies in all respects with the requirements of Oregon election law.