BODKIN v. BOLIA (2009)

This is an appeal from the dismissal of a petition for writ of mandamus, filed pursuant to OCGA § 21-2-171(c),¹ seeking to compel the grant of a nomination petition in an election for public office. For the reasons which follow, the appeal is dismissed.

Marcela Bodkin filed a nomination petition with the Clayton County Board of Elections and Registration (“Board of Elections”) to be listed on the November 4, 2008 general election ballot as an independent candidate for a seat on the Clayton County School Board, District 6. A letter dated July 14, 2008, from Bright, the Elections Director of the Board of Elections, to Bodkin informed Bodkin that her nomination petition did not meet the qualifications for her name to be placed on the ballot because it did not contain the number of registered voters' signatures required by OCGA § 21-2-170(b).² On July 30, 2008, Bodkin filed, in the Superior Court of Clayton County, a petition for writ of mandamus against Bob Bolia, the Board of Elections chairman, and others,³ asserting that her nomination petition was “miscounted, improperly counted, and that there were irregularities in the process leading to the unlawful decision to keep her off the November ballot.” The petition was served upon Bright. Bolia moved to dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus on the grounds that it was untimely filed under OCGA § 21-2-171(c), and that service of process was insufficient. Following a hearing on September 30, 2008, the superior court granted Bolia's motion to dismiss, expressly finding that Bodkin's petition for mandamus was not timely filed pursuant to OCGA § 21-2-171(c), and that Bodkin failed to perfect service of process upon Bolia.

Bodkin contends that the superior court erred in dismissing the mandamus petition based upon either failure to perfect service or timeliness. She maintains that there was a lack of evidence that Bright was not authorized to accept service on behalf of Bolia and that her suit should be deemed timely because the five-day time frame for filing was not triggered until she received a copy of the July 14, 2008 letter by certified mail on July 25, 2008.⁴ However, regardless of the merits or lack thereof of Bodkin's claims, her present appeal is moot. City of Greenville v. Bray, 284 Ga. 641, 642, 670 S.E.2d 98 (2008). An appeal is to be dismissed if the question presented has become moot, see OCGA 5-6-48(b)(3), and the mootness doctrine applies to a pre-election challenge such as this when the general election has already taken place. Randolph County v. Johnson, 282 Ga. 160, 161(1), 646 S.E.2d 261 (2007). Accordingly, the present appeal must be dismissed as moot. City of Greenville v. Bray, supra at 642, 670 S.E.2d 98.

Appeal dismissed.

HINES, Justice.

All the Justices concur.