Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Cramer v. Brown

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 20, 1983No. 83-1556PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Per curiam

The first two of relator’s challenges relate to the ballot language and explanation. Section 1, Article XVI of the Ohio Constitution, dealing with proposals initiated by the General Assembly, provides that “* * * [n]o such case challenging the ballot language, the explanation, or the actions or procedures of the general assembly in adopting and submitting a constitutional amendment shall be filed later than sixty-four days before the election.” The sixty-four day limitation was held to apply to initiatives proposed by the electorate as well in State, ex rel. Cappelletti, v. Celebrezze (1980),…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State, Ex Rel. v. BigelowOhio Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Coca-Cola Bottling Corp. v. LindleyOhio Supreme Court · 1978
  3. State ex rel. Cappelletti v. CelebrezzeOhio Supreme Court · 1980

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Missourians to Protect the Initiative Process v. BluntSupreme Court of Missouri · 1990
  2. Jurcisin v. Cuyahoga County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Hessey v. BurdenDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
  4. The State Ex Rel. Walker Et Al. v. HustedOhio Supreme Court · 2015
  5. Opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court Given Under the Provisions of Section 3 of Article VI of the ConstitutionSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1993

11 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