Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Willke v. Taft

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 4, 2005No. 2005-1647PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Per curiam

{¶ 1} This is an action in mandamus and injunction under Section 1, Article XVI of the Ohio Constitution to prevent the submission of a constitutional amendment to Ohio electors.

{¶ 2} In August 2005, the General Assembly adopted Am.Sub.H.J.R. 2 (“H.J.R. 2”), which proposed “to enact Section 2p of Article VIII of the Constitution of the State of Ohio to permit the issuance of general obligation bonds to create and preserve jobs, enhance employment and educational opportunities, and promote economic growth through funding local government public infrastructure capital improvements, research and…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Johnson v. HarrisonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
  2. State ex rel. Steele v. MorrisseyOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  3. Armatta v. KitzhaberOregon Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Hoover v. Board of County CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 1985
  5. State ex rel. Dix v. CelesteOhio Supreme Court · 1984

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

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. State v. BloomerOhio Supreme Court · 2009
  2. State ex rel. Colvin v. BrunnerOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  3. State ex rel. Ohio Liberty Council v. BrunnerOhio Supreme Court · 2010
  4. State ex rel. Owens v. BrunnerOhio Supreme Court · 2010
  5. State Ex Rel. Voters First v. Ohio Ballot BoardOhio Supreme Court · 2012

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