Case: Libertarian Party v. Hazeltine

3:00-cv-03021 | U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota

Filed Date: May 4, 2000

Closed Date: 2000

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On May 4, 2000, the Libertarian Party of South Dakota and several concerned citizens filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota. The plaintiffs sued South Dakota, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Represented by private counsel, they asked the court for both declaratory and injunctive relief, alleging that the State misinterpreted state election law when it denied Libertarian Party candidate Brian Lerohl’s request to be added to the primary election ballot. Specificall…

On May 4, 2000, the Libertarian Party of South Dakota and several concerned citizens filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota. The plaintiffs sued South Dakota, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Represented by private counsel, they asked the court for both declaratory and injunctive relief, alleging that the State misinterpreted state election law when it denied Libertarian Party candidate Brian Lerohl’s request to be added to the primary election ballot. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that the Libertarian Party should be designated a “political party” pursuant to SDCL 12-6-7.

Arguments focused on the requirements of the “political party” designation. In its May 25, 2000, answer, the State claimed that because the Libertarian Party had not, in the 1998 election, achieved the requisite percentage of votes to be considered a “political party,” it had to reregister as a “new party” for the 2000 election. The State asserted that a “new party” must meet a higher threshold of signatures on a nominating petition than a party with a “voting history.” The Libertarian Party had not satisfied this requirement.

On August 8, 2000, the District Court (Judge Richard H. Battey) ordered in favor of the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, granting declaratory and injunctive relief, and attorneys’ fees. A "satisfaction of judgment" was filed soon thereafter and the case was marked closed.

Summary Authors

Nick Niles (6/23/2006)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6320316/parties/libertarian-party-v-hazeltine/


Judge(s)

Battey, Richard Howard (South Dakota)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Hyde, Kent (South Dakota)

Attorney for Defendant

Wald, Sherri Sundem (South Dakota)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

3:00-cv-03021

Docket (Pacer)

May 4, 2000

May 4, 2000

Docket
1

3:00-cv-03021

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief

Libertarian Party of South Dakota v. Hazeltine

May 4, 2000

May 4, 2000

Complaint
25

3:00-cv-03021

Memorandum Opinion and Order

Aug. 8, 2000

Aug. 8, 2000

Order/Opinion

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6320316/libertarian-party-v-hazeltine/

Last updated Dec. 20, 2024, 7:24 a.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

Case Details

State / Territory: South Dakota

Case Type(s):

Election/Voting Rights

Key Dates

Filing Date: May 4, 2000

Closing Date: 2000

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

The Libertarian Party, a 2000 Libertarian candidate for U.S. House of Representatives, and a frequent Libertarian candidate for public office

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

State of South Dakota, State

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Constitutional Clause(s):

Equal Protection

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Attorneys fees

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Form of Settlement:

Confession of Judgment

Issues

Affected Race(s):

Race, unspecified

Voting:

Candidate qualifications

Election administration