Opinion ID: 1292120
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Secret Vote Count

Text: Town argues that the circuit court erred in holding that the vote count was conducted in secret thereby violating section 5-15-120. It is not necessary to reach the merits of this claim because it was not timely raised to Election Commission. The only issue Butler could have raised on appeal to the circuit court was whether Election Commission should have afforded him a hearing based on his May 5 letter. Butler did not include the secret vote count claim in his protest letter. Section 5-15-140 does not provide the circuit court with express or implied authority to conduct a full hearing when one is denied by the municipal election commission. The circuit court, in this situation, is by statute an appellate court. It is axiomatic that one cannot present and try his case on one theory and thereafter advocate another theory on appeal. White v. Livingston, 231 S.C. 301, 306, 98 S.E.2d 534, 537 (1957); see also Indigo Associates v. Ryan Investment Co., 314 S.C. 519, 523, 431 S.E.2d 271, 273 (1993) (holding, The circuit court, acting as an appellate court in a case heard by the magistrate, cannot consider questions that have not been presented to the magistrate.). We hold that the circuit court had no authority to consider the secret vote count allegation because Butler never raised it to Election Commission.