No. 25-5287

Andrew W. Bell v. Karli Swift, et al.

Lower Court: Georgia
Docketed: 2025-08-06
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: constitutional-guarantees due-process election-contest fourteenth-amendment judicial-jurisdiction service-of-process
Key Terms:
DueProcess Securities JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2025-12-12 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether Georgia courts may dismiss election-contest petitions for 'failure to perfect service' when statutory duty for service rests with clerks and sheriffs rather than petitioners

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

Petitioner challenged the December 3, 2024 runoff for the vacant DeKalb County District 3 seat by filing an emergency contest on December 9 under O.C.G.A. §§ 21-2-522 & 21-2-524. By statute the Superior Court Clerk was to issue “special process ” notification to the Sheriff and the presiding judge could immediately convene a hearing —but no notice or hearing ever occurred. Instead, on January 17, 2025 the Superior Court dismissed the petition as untimely. Petitioner appealed to the Georgia Supreme Court on February 13, 2025, receiving two opinions that same day: one in S25I0586 (interlocutory appeal dismissed for lack of certification) and another in S25D0637, which he now seeks here. In S25D0637 the Court admitted it has “exclusive jurisdiction over ‘[a]ll cases of election contest ’” (Ga. Const. Art. VI, § VI, 11(2)) but refused to exercise it because the trial court had never “resolved any elections-related matters, ” transferring the case instead to the Court of Appeals. The following questions are presented: 1. Whether Georgia courts may dismiss election-contest petitions for “failure to perfect service ” when O.C.G.A. § 21-2-524(f) places that duty on clerks and sheriffs —not on petitioners? 2. Whether the Georgia Supreme Court ’s transfer of a discrete election-contest appeal —despite its “exclusive jurisdiction ” under Ga. Const. Art. VI, § VI, Tf 11(2) —violates both state and federal constitutional guarantees of judicial access? 3. Whether denial of actual notice, refusal to re-enter judgments, and failure to apply equitable tolling deprive litigants of due process under the Fourteenth Amendment? 4. Whether repeated judicial and administrative breakdowns in Georgia — exemplified by delayed hearings, docket mismanagement, altered certification documents, and conflict with Eleventh Circuit en banc rules — require federal review under 28 U.S.C. § 1257(a)?

Docket Entries

2025-12-15
Rehearing DENIED.
2025-11-25
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/12/2025.
2025-10-23
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2025-10-06
Petition DENIED.
2025-09-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2025.
2025-09-04
Waiver of right of respondents John Fervier, Sara Tindall Ghazal, Janice W. Johnston, Rick Jeffares, Janelle King, Blake Evans, Brad Raffensperger to respond filed.
2025-09-04
Waiver of right of respondents Vasu Abhriraman, Dekalb County Voter Registration and Election Board, Nancy Jester, Anthony Lewis, Susan Motter, Keisha Smith, and Karli Swift to respond filed.
2025-03-31
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 5, 2025)

Attorneys

Andrew Bell
Andrew W. Bell — Petitioner
Andrew W. Bell — Petitioner
John Fervier, Sara Tindall Ghazal, Janice W. Johnston, Rick Jeffares, Janelle King, Blake Evans, Brad Raffensperger
Stephen John PetranyGeorgia Department of Law, Respondent
Stephen John PetranyGeorgia Department of Law, Respondent
Vasu Abhriraman, Dekalb County Voter Registration and Election Board, Nancy Jester, Anthony Lewis, Susan Motter, Keisha Smith, and Karli Swift
Brent William HerrinSmall | Herrin, LLP, Respondent
Brent William HerrinSmall | Herrin, LLP, Respondent