Case: Tomasik v. Goins
3:13-cv-01118 | U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee
Filed Date: Oct. 9, 2013
Closed Date: Jan. 27, 2014
Clearinghouse coding complete
Case Summary
This is a case about the legality of certain state election laws as applied to the Chairman of the Libertarian Party of Tennessee for the 2013 Tennessee Special General Election for State House District 91 to be held on November 21, 2013 and all subsequent Special General Elections in the State of Tennessee.
On October 9, 2013, the Chairman of the Libertarian Party of Tennessee and a candidate for the office of Tennessee State Representative in State House District 91 for the Special General Election to be held on November 21, 2013, a member of the Libertarian Party of Tennessee who desired to vote for the Chairman of the Libertarian Party of Tennessee, and the Libertarian Party of Tennessee (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District for the Middle District of Tennessee before Judge William J. Haynes, Jr. Plaintiffs sued the State of Tennessee (“defendant”) under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and Title 42, United States Code, § 1983. Represented by private counsel, Plaintiffs sought a judgment declaring that T.C.A., §§ 2-1-104(a)(14), 2-1-104(a)(24), 2-1 104(a)(31), 2-5-208(d)(1, 2-13-107(a)(2), 2-13-201(a), and 2-14-202 (collectively, “the Statutes”) as applied to Plaintiffs for the 2013 Tennessee Special General Election for State House District 91 and all subsequent Special General Elections in the State of Tennessee were unconstitutional, and a temporary and permanent injunction against defendant from following and enforcing the provisions of the Statutes. Plaintiffs claimed that without court intervention they would not be able to obtain ballot access with their candidate listed as the Libertarian candidate rather than the Independent candidate for State House District 91 in the Special General Election to be held on November 13, 2012 or subsequent Special General Elections. In relevant part, the complaint asserted: “T.C.A., § 2-1-104(a)(14) defines a political party as an organization which nominates candidates for public office, T.C.A., § 2-1-104(a)(24), and taken in conjunction with T.C.A., §§ 2-1-104(a)(31), 2-5-208(d)(1), 2-13-107(a)(2), 2-13-201(a), and 2-14-202, a new statewide political party or minor political party to be recognized to run candidates in a special general election ballot in the State of Tennessee must petition successfully by presenting a petition with at least 2.5 percent of the total number of votes cast for all gubernatorial candidates in the most recent gubernatorial election as shown by petitions to establish a political party filed with the Coordinator of Elections and signed by Tennessee registered voters so that it would find it virtually impossible to meet the petition deadline for minor political parties of 90 days before the general election, pursuant to T.C.A., § 2-13-107(a)(2), before the special general election when the special general election will be set according to law (viz.: T.C.A., §2-14-202) between 100 and 107 days from the date of the writs for a special general election to fill the vacancy.”
On October 15, 2013, Plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary injunction to enjoin the enforcement of the Statutes as applied to plaintiffs for Special General Election for State House District 91 to be held on November 21, 2012, and specifically requested that defendant be ordered to place the Chairman of the Libertarian Party of Tennessee on the ballot as a Libertarian candidate rather than an Independent candidate. Plaintiffs argued that the Chairman of the Libertarian Party of Tennessee “was unable to petition to obtain ballot status as a representative of the Libertarian minor party because it is virtually impossible under the petition signature requirement, petitioning time, and petitioning deadline of 90 days before a general election for a minor party to get recognized because of the time constraints involved in special general elections.”
On October 24, 2013, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint naming the Shelby County Election Commission as an additional defendant in the lawsuit. The allegations and relief sought remained the same.
On October 31, 2023, defendants filed a response to the motion for preliminary injunction stating that the Statutes required placement of the Chairman of the Libertarian Party of Tennessee’s name on the ballot as an Independent candidate and requesting that the motion for preliminary injunction be denied because defendants did not have the authority to consent to a change in the format of the ballot.
On October 31, 2023, the court heard Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction and granted the motion. (This was a consolidated hearing on the motion for preliminary relief and the merits of the case.) As reflected in the Judgment which was entered on November 25, 2013, the court ruled that the Statutes as applied to Plaintiffs for the Special General Election for State House District 91 to be held on November 21, 2013 were unconstitutional “for the reasons set forth on the record in open Court during the hearing”. In an order filed on January 27, 2014, Plaintiffs’ counsel were awarded attorneys’ fees and expenses in the amount of $26,091.00. The case is now closed.
Summary Authors
Melina Kountouris (10/24/2023)
People
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5038219/parties/tomasik-v-goins/
Haynes, William Joseph (Tennessee)
Documents in the Clearinghouse
Docket
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5038219/tomasik-v-goins/
Last updated April 16, 2026, 4:57 a.m.
Case Details
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Law Firm Antiracism Alliance (LFAA) project
Key Dates
Filing Date: Oct. 9, 2013
Closing Date: Jan. 27, 2014
Case Ongoing: No
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Libertarian Party of Tennessee
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
County
Shelby County Election Commission
State
State of Tennessee
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Constitutional Clause(s):
Other Dockets:
Middle District of Tennessee 3:13-cv-01118
Available Documents:
Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Plaintiff OR Mixed
Relief Granted:
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order
Source of Relief:
Content of Injunction:
Amount Defendant Pays: $26,091.00
Order Duration: 2013 - 2013
Issues
Voting:
Case Summary of Tomasik v. Goins, Civil Rights Litig. Clearinghouse, http://www.dev.clearinghouse.net/case/43364/ (last updated 10/24/2023).