Case: Grayeyes v. Cox
4:18-cv-00041 | U.S. District Court for the District of Utah
Filed Date: June 20, 2018
Closed Date: Nov. 7, 2018
Clearinghouse coding complete
Case Summary
This case involved allegations that Defendants in their capacity as state officials had wrongfully denied Plaintiff access to the ballot as a candidate in a county election. Plaintiff sought an injunction to be included on the ballot for County Commissioner.
Plaintiff was a member of Navajo Nation in San Juan County, Utah where he lived and operated a business. Plaintiff was a registered voter and voted in San Juan County elections for at least 18 years. Defendants claimed that Plaintiff was not a resident of San Juan County and could not be registered to vote, thus could not fulfill Utah Codes §17-53-202 and §17-16-1(1), requiring Plaintiff to be a registered voter in the county for a full year prior to running for County Commissioner.
On March 20, 2018, Defendant Black emailed Defendant Nielson to challenge the validity of Plaintiff’s candidacy based on his residency, and Defendant Nielson initiated an investigation the following day. On March 23, 2018, Defendant Turk of the San Juan County Sheriff’s Office conducted the investigation and his report showed the involvement of Defendant Kendall Laws, the son of Kelly Laws, who was running against Plaintiff in the election. On April 19, 2018, the Communications Coordinator for San Juan County issued a press release that Plaintiff’s candidacy was being investigated and he would not be on the ballot. Plaintiff engaged counsel and from April 27th to May 1st, 2018 sought to receive information about the investigation. Despite their efforts, Plaintiff’s counsel was unable to gain access to this information. On May 9th, 2018, Defendant Nielson issued his decision that Plaintiff was not a resident of San Juan County and ineligible to register to vote, and could not be a candidate for office of County Commissioner. Plaintiffs argued that Defendant Nielson’s investigation was improperly conducted and done with discriminatory bias against Plaintiff as a Navajo voter. Plaintiff noted he was considered the favored candidate to win and had been engaged in liberal politics, while all Defendants involved in denying his access to the ballot were engaged in conservative politics.
On June 20, 2018, Plaintiff filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division. Plaintiff had four main claims. First, that that Utah Codes §17-53-202 and §17-16-1(1) were unconstitutional on their face as they did not serve a legitimate and compelling government purpose. Plaintiff also claimed Utah Codes §17-53-202, §17-16-1, §20A-3-202.3, §20A-2-105, and §20A-2-101 were applied unlawfully in a partisan and discriminatory manner by Defendants, and in his third claim he alleged that the process of investigating his qualifications under these codes violated due process. Plaintiff’s final claim was for proper application of the state residency statute for voter registration process.
On August 9th, 2018, the court ruled in favor of Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction, finding that Defendant Nielson had failed to provide proper notice of the challenge to the Plaintiff and failed to follow appropriate candidacy challenge procedures, and thus denied Plaintiff due process. The court further found Defendant Nielson had not acted as a neutral actor in the investigation, and his actions had not been permitted or authorized by statute. The court ordered that Defendant Nielson was enjoined from taking any further action on the challenges filed by Defendant Black, and his decision on May 9th was ineffective to bar Plaintiff from his status as a candidate. Defendants were ordered to comply with statutory procedures in regard to Plaintiff’s status as an eligible candidate.
On November 7th, 2018 Plaintiffs moved for the case to be dismissed as moot, as Plaintiff was successfully included on the ballot for the November 6th election and no further relief could be granted. The court dismissed the case while retaining jurisdiction over attorney’s fees.
The case is now closed.
Summary Authors
Lauren Simon (5/3/2024)
People
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/7230950/parties/grayeyes-v-cox/
Nuffer, David Ogden (Utah)
Documents in the Clearinghouse
Docket
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/7230950/grayeyes-v-cox/
Last updated April 13, 2026, 4:35 a.m.
Case Details
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Law Firm Antiracism Alliance (LFAA) project
Key Dates
Filing Date: June 20, 2018
Closing Date: Nov. 7, 2018
Case Ongoing: No
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
An individual running for San Juan County Commissioner
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
County
State Officials in San Juan County
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Constitutional Clause(s):
Due Process: Procedural Due Process
Other Dockets:
District of Utah 4:18-cv-00041
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:
Order Duration: 2018 - 2018
Issues
Affected Race(s):
American Indian/Alaskan Native
Affected Sex/Gender(s):
Voting:
Challenges to at-large/multimember district/election
Voting: Physical/Effective Access
Case Summary of Grayeyes v. Cox, Civil Rights Litig. Clearinghouse, http://www.dev.clearinghouse.net/case/44822/ (last updated 5/3/2024).