This database consolidates and tracks litigation concerning the effect of the pandemic on election law. The purpose of this tool is to provide an interactive list of relevant cases that can be searched by issue, court, status, and jurisdiction.
Case Details
Kraus v. Cegavske
Closed
Kraus v. Cegavske, No. 20 OC 00142 1B (Nev. Dist. Ct., Carson City) |
||
| Case Summary | The plaintiffs, Nevada Republican Party and Trump’s re-election campaign, sought a temporary restraining ordering Clark County to immediately halt the county’s ballot processing and counting. They argued the county’s signature verification process for mail-in ballots was lacking and that observers were not being provided ample opportunities to view or challenge the work of election workers. They asked the judge to force election officials to allow “meaningful observation” of the verification of mail-in ballots, including allowing watchers to have access to all parts of the verification process and be close enough to verify data, including being able to see individual voter signatures. | |
| Filed | 10/23/2020 | |
| State | Nevada | |
| Type of Court | State | |
| Status | Closed | |
| Last Updated | 05/14/2021 | |
| Issue Tag(s) | Vote-by-Mail (Poll Observer Access, Signature Verification Standards, Notice/Cure for Mismatches Missing Signature or Mistakes) Poll observer access |
|
| Complaint(s) | 10/23/2020: Complaint filed. | |
| Dispositive Ruling(s) | 10/29/2020: Order/Ruling, The court held that plaintiffs lacked standing, having proved no direct or indirect injury. But the court went on to find that no proof of an equal protection violation was presented nor was there any statutory basis for the level of poll observation plaintiffs were seeking. | |
Kraus v. Cegavske, No. 82018 (Nev. Sup. Ct.) |
||
| Case Summary | Kraus, Donald J. Trump for President, and the Nevada Republican party sought a stay of a lower court order allowing duplication of mail ballots without observation, the use of artificial intelligence to expedite appeals. | |
| Filed | 11/03/2020 | |
| State | Nevada | |
| Type of Court | State | |
| Status | Closed | |
| Last Updated | 05/14/2021 | |
| Issue Tag(s) | Vote-by-Mail (Poll Observer Access, Signature Verification Standards, Notice/Cure for Mismatches Missing Signature or Mistakes) Poll observer access |
|
| Dispositive Ruling(s) | 11/03/2020: Appellant Brief, Kraus, Donald J. Trump for President, and the Nevada Republican party seek a stay of a lower court order allowing duplication of mail ballots without observation and the use of artificial intelligence to expedite appeals. Appellants filed an emergency motion seeking immediate relief under NRAP 8, pending appeal, prohibiting the Clark County Registrar from continuing to duplicate mail ballots unless observers are granted an opportunity to meaningfully observe the process and from using artificial intelligence to authenticate ballot signatures. Appellants also seek to expedite this appeal. | |
| 11/03/2020: Order/Ruling, In an order signed by all seven members, the Nevada Supreme Court granted the request to expedite the appeal but denied the motion for an emergency stay stopping the county from processing ballots. The court granted the motion as to the request to expedite the appeal because the matter involves the election process currently underway. The Court provided Appellants until 4 p.m. on Thursday, November 5, 2020, to file and serve opening brief and defined an expedited briefing schedule. The court denied appellants' request to enjoin the registrar from duplicating ballots and using artificial intelligence to authenticate ballots. Appellants have not demonstrated a sufficient likelihood of success to merit a stay or injunction. The court cited the district court’s conclusion that appellants' allegations lacked evidentiary support, and noted that “appellant’s request for relief to this court is not supported by affidavit or record materials supporting many of the factual statements made therein....It is unclear from the motion how appellants are being prevented from observing the process or that the use of the Agilis machine is prohibited under AB 4....Appellants motion, on its face, does not identify any mandatory statutory duty that respondents appear to have ignored. Further, appellants fail to address the district court's conclusion that they lack standing to pursue this relief. Thus, appellants have not shown that the NRAP 8(c) factors militate in favor of a stay or injunction, and the request for immediate relief is denied.” | ||
| 11/05/2020: Other, Appellants file an emergency motion for a 7-day extension of time to file their docketing statement, opening brief, and appendix pending settlement. | ||
| 11/10/2020: Order/Ruling, The Nevada Supreme Court granted appellants' motion to dismiss and return jurisdiction to the district court so that the parties may submit the stipulation resulting from their settlement agreernent to allow more poll observers. | ||
