Overview

Michigan law does not provide for election contests, specifically. Instead, the state provides the remedy of “quo warranto” to contest the election results for all elected offices. [1] In an action for quo warranto, the theory is that the winning candidate has “usurp[ed], intruded[d] into, or unlawfully [held] or exercise[d] a state office.” MCR 3.306(A)-(B); Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 600.4501(1). If the court finds against the winning candidate, the candidate is removed from office, and the court may declare another candidate the candidate entitled to the office. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 600.4505(1).

In addition, in cases of suspected material fraud or error in an election to decide a constitutional amendment, question, or proposition, the Michigan Attorney General or the prosecuting attorney of the appropriate county can bring an action against a municipality. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 600.4545(1)-(2). This proceeding follows similar procedures as a quo warranto action. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 600.4545(3).

For the office of President or Vice President, a candidate who “is aggrieved” by the Board of State Canvassers making an error in the certification or determination of the results of a presidential election may seek judicial review by a complaint for mandamus. This proceeding is the exclusive means of seeking judicial relief from the certification or determination of results of a presidential election. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 168.845a(6).

Quo Warranto

Usurpation of Office

The Michigan Attorney General is responsible for bringing an action for quo warranto against a person who “usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises a state office”. MCR 3.306(A)-(B); Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 600.4501(1). Any person may apply to the Michigan Attorney General to request a quo warranto **action be taken. MCR 3.306(B)(3); Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 600.4501(1). If the Michigan Attorney General refuses to bring the action, the person may apply directly to the appropriate court to bring the action. MCR 3.306(B)(3); Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 600.4501(1). However, a private person may not bring an action for quo warranto for the office of electors of President and Vice President of the United States. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 600.4501(2).

An action for quo warranto against a person who usurps or unlawfully holds state office must be brought in the Court of Appeals. MCR 3.306(A). All other actions for quo warranto must be brought in the Circuit Court. MCR 3.306(A). The court has the discretion to hear the matter itself or try the matter by jury. MCR 3.306(E).

The judgment in the quo warranto action determines whether the defendant has the right to hold office. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 600.4505(1). If the person who filed the action claims to be entitled to hold the office at issue, the court may decide in that person’s favor and grant the claim to office. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 600.4505(1). If a person is found guilty of usurping or unlawfully holding office in a quo warranto proceeding, the person is ousted from office as a result. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 600.4515. In addition, the court may impose a fine upon the person of up to $2,000. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 600.4515.

If the person rightfully entitled to the usurped office is a party to the claim, the person is entitled to any damages sustained because of the usurpation of the office by the defendant. The person may bring the claim for damages at the same time as the claim for quo warranto or separately within one year after the judgment in the quo warranto action. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 600.4511.

Election Fraud

In addition, the Michigan Attorney General or the prosecuting attorney of the appropriate county can bring an action against a municipality if it appears that “material fraud or error” has occurred in an election to decide a constitutional amendment, question, or proposition at the state, county, township, or municipal level. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 600.4545(1)-(2). This type of action must be brought in the Circuit Court of the municipality’s county no later than 30 days after the election. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 600.4545(2). The procedures used in the action “must conform as near as may be to that provided by law for action for quo warranto.” Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 600.4545(3).

The remedy of quo warranto is also available when there is suspected fraudulent or illegal voting or when there is suspected tampering with ballots or ballot boxes by the Board of County Canvassers. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 168.861.

Mandamus

A candidate listed on the ballot for the office of President or Vice President who “is aggrieved” by an error in the certification or determination of the results of a presidential election by the Board of State Canvassers may seek judicial review by a complaint for mandamus. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 168.845a(1). A candidate is “aggrieved” if, but for the error, the candidate would have received the largest number of votes in the presidential election. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 168.845a(1).

The aggrieved candidate must file the complaint for mandamus within 48 hours after the certification or determination of the results and must name the Board of State Canvassers as the defendant. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 168.845a(2). The Governor, Attorney General, Secretary of State, and the winning candidate may intervene in the proceeding. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 168.845a(2).

The Michigan Supreme Court has original and exclusive jurisdiction to consider a complaint for mandamus. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 168.845a(2). The Michigan Supreme Court must issue a final order before the date the electors for President and Vice President convene. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 168.845a(2). This proceeding is the exclusive means of seeking judicial relief from the certification or determination of results of a presidential election. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 168.845a(6).

Other Remedies

In addition to the Recounts procedures available, any losing candidate for county, city, ward, township, or village office may request that election returns be “examined and corrected” upon certiorari to the Circuit Court for “error apparent upon the face of the returns”. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 168.877. For amendments and propositions on the ballot, any person who voted in the election can request the same. Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 168.877.