Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Polcyn v. Burkhart

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 8, 1973No. 72-796PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Per curiam

Appellants’ main contention is that the Toledo City Council is not required to submit to the electorate a proposed amendment to the Charter of the city of Toledo if, in Council’s opinion, the substantive content of the proposed amendment is “invalid on its face,” even though there are a sufficient number of valid signatures on the petition proposing such an amendment.

Section 9, Article XVIII of the Ohio Constitution, provides, in part:

“Amendments to any charter framed and adopted as herein provided may be submitted to the electors of a municipality by a two-thirds vote of the legislative…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Markus v. Trumbull County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1970
  2. State, Ex Rel. v. BigelowOhio Supreme Court · 1941
  3. State Ex Rel. Hinchliffe v. GibbonsOhio Supreme Court · 1927
  4. State Ex Rel. Waltz v. MichellOhio Supreme Court · 1931
  5. State Ex Rel. Poor v. AddisonOhio Supreme Court · 1937

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. State v. SteffenOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  2. State ex rel. Huebner v. West Jefferson Village CouncilOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Morris v. City CouncilOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  4. State ex rel. Citizens for a Better Portsmouth v. SydnorOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  5. State v. SteffenOhio Supreme Court · 1994

17 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