Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Governor v. Taft

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 21, 1994No. 94-1553PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Per curiam

For the following reasons, we grant respondent’s motion for summary judgment.

Relator seeks alternative orders: first, a declaration that Am.Sub. S.B. No. 20 is void, and a writ of prohibition and mandamus “ordering” respondent to refuse acceptance for filing of Am.S.B. No. 20; alternatively, a declaration that the Act is void, “a writ of mandamus to Respondent ordering him to strike the language of [Am.Sub.] S.B. 20 from the laws of the State of Ohio,” and a “writ of prohibition ordering Respondent not to publish and distribute the language of [Am.Sub.] S.B. 20 as the law of Ohio.” Thus,…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Pressley v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1967
  2. State ex rel. Hodges v. TaftOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  3. State Ex Rel. Stanley v. CookOhio Supreme Court · 1946
  4. In re Protest Filed with the Franklin County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Maloney v. RhodesOhio Supreme Court · 1976

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Crabtree v. Franklin County Board of HealthOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  2. State ex rel. Grendell v. DavidsonOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  3. State ex rel. Purdy v. Clermont County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  4. State ex rel. Thurn v. Cuyahoga County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. State ex rel. Lanham v. Ohio Adult Parole AuthorityOhio Supreme Court · 1997

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API