A former Port Arthur councilwoman who was unseated in May's election after losing by three votes is now challenging those results. Tiffany Hamilton filed the petition contesting the election's outcome Friday with the Jefferson County District Clerk's office.
A former Port Arthur councilwoman who was unseated in May's election after losing by three votes is now challenging those results. Tiffany Hamilton filed the petition contesting the election's outcome Friday with the Jefferson County District Clerk's office.
A former Port Arthur councilwoman who was unseated in May's election after losing by three votes is now challenging those results. Tiffany Hamilton filed the petition contesting the election's outcome Friday with the Jefferson County District Clerk's office.
FILED
DISTRICT CLERK OF
JEFFERSON CO TEXAS
6/16/2017 8:17:33 AM
JAMIE SMITH
No bismer ete
TIFFANY HAMILTON 8 IN THE DISTRICT COURT
v. 5 JEFFERSON COUNTY, TEXAS
CARROLL JONES : JUDICIAL DISTRICT
CONTESTANT’S ORIGINAL PETITION
COMES NOW, Tiffany Hamilton, and files this Original Petition contesting the
outcome of the election for the office of Port Arthur City Councilmember for District 2,
held on the 6" day of May, 2017, and would show unto the Court as follows:
DISCOVERY LEVEL
1. Discovery is intended to be conducted under Level 2 of Tex. R. Civ. P. 190.
PARTIES
2. Contestant Tiffany Hamilton was a candidate for Port Arthur City
Councilmember for District 2 in the May 6, 2017, city election.
3. Contestee Carroll Jones opposed Contestant in the election for Port Arthur
City Councilmember for District 2 in the city election. He may be served with process
at 5200 Lakeside Drive, Port Arthur, Texas 77642,
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
4, This Contest is brought pursuant to Chapters 221, 231 and 232 of the Texas
Election Code. Venue is set by law in Jefferson County, Texas.FACTUAL BASIS
5. Contestant was shown to have lost the race by 3 votes. The final canvass
was Hamilton had 148 votes and Jones 151 votes.
6. There were a number of eligible voters who attempted to vote in this
election but were not allowed to vote by election officials on the improper ground that
these voters did not live in the proper voting district for the election between the
Contestant and Contestee or on other improper grounds. None of these eligible voters
were allowed to cast ballots and were not counted in the process. Below are three voters
that were eligible voters that were denied their right to vote in the election:
(a) Fred R. Vernon, Sr.
2040 Williams Ave
Port Arthur, Texas
(b) — Sherold Alpough & Curtis Alpough
440 11th Ave.
Port Arthur, Texas
7. On information and belief Contestant says that there are additional voters
that were denied the right to vote.
8 On information and belief there were a number of voters who were not
cligible to vote in this election, but whose votes were included in the count.
9. On information and belief, the number of illegal votes that were counted
when combined with the number of eligible voters who were not permitted to cast
ballots in this election is in a number sufficient to change the outcome of the election.CAUSE OF ACTION
10. Based on the above facts, Contestant brings this cause of action for an
election contest to declare her the winner of said election on the basis that:
(a) Persons who were eligible to vote in this election were denied the
ight to vote in the election at issue.
(b) Persons who were not eligible to vote in this election had their votes
were included in the count.
(€) The errors that caused persons who were eligible to vote to be
denied the right to vote and that allowed persons to vote that were ineligible to
vote to have ballots counted in this election were caused by the persons charged
with registering voters and holding the election.
(4) If the votes of persons who were denied the right to vote, the
persons who should have had their votes counted and the votes cast by persons
who were not eligible to vote in the election at issue are correctly tallied,
Contestant is the winner of this election.
11. _ In the alternative, if the evidence shows that the true outcome of the
election cannot be determined because of the allegations recited above, then the Court
must call a new election as provided by the Texas Election Code to determine the winner
of the election.PRAYER
WHEREFORE, Contestant respectfully requests this Court to declare her the
winner of the election at issue. If the Court cannot determine the true winner of the
election, Contestant respectfully requests this Court void the results of the election and
order a new election in accordance with the Texas Election Code.
Respectfully submitted,
RAY & WOOD
Randall Buck Wood ¢
State Bar No. 21902000
2700 Bee Caves Road, Suite 200
Austin, Texas 78716
(212) 328-8877 (Telephone)
(212) 328-1126 (Fascimile)
rryan@raywoodlaw.com
ATTORNEYS FOR CONTESTANT