## Facts

- Simpsonville held a municipal election on November 8, 2005, including an at-large race for the Ward IV city council seat.
- After a provisional-ballot hearing and recount, the election commission certified a final tally of 430–427 for Robert Gecy, with one write-in vote.
- Tammy Bagwell filed a timely post-election protest under S.C. Code Ann. § 5-15-130.
- After a hearing, the election commission found at least two illegal votes were cast by voters who voted in precincts inconsistent with their residences after failing to update addresses or notify election officials.
- The commission subtracted the two illegal votes from Gecy’s total, reducing him to 428 votes, and concluded the illegal votes rendered the result doubtful; it ordered a new election.
- Gecy appealed to the circuit court, which reversed the commission, reinstated Gecy as winner, and ruled Bagwell’s protest notice insufficiently specific.
- Bagwell appealed to the South Carolina Supreme Court.

## Issues

1. Whether the election commission properly ordered a new election after finding illegal votes that rendered the election result doubtful.
2. Whether Bagwell’s written notice of protest satisfied S.C. Code Ann. § 5-15-130’s requirement to state the grounds of protest.

## Decision

- The South Carolina Supreme Court reversed the circuit court.
- The Court reinstated the election commission’s order requiring a new election for the Ward IV seat.
- The Court held the commission’s finding of illegal votes and its determination that the result was doubtful were supported and within its authority.
- The Court held Bagwell’s protest notice adequately stated the grounds of protest and was legally sufficient.

## Legal Principles

- In municipal election contests, judicial review is limited; courts should not reweigh the evidence and should uphold an election commission’s supported factual findings and actions within statutory authority.
- When illegal votes are shown and the commission finds they render the election result doubtful, the commission may set aside the election and order a new election.
- Where an election requires a majority of total votes cast, deducting illegal votes from a candidate’s total may defeat the claimed majority and support a determination that the result is doubtful.
- A protest under S.C. Code Ann. § 5-15-130 is sufficient if timely and if it states the grounds with enough clarity to inform the contestee and the commission of the nature of the objections; strict pleading-level specificity is not required.

## Conclusion

The court restored the election commission’s decision to order a new election because evidence supported the finding that illegal precinct votes affected a very close race and made the result doubtful, and because the challenger’s protest notice adequately stated the grounds required by statute.


Gecy v. Bagwell, 642 S.E.2d 569 (S.C. 2007)