Legal Opinion

Armour v. State of Ohio

District Court, N.D. Ohio

Decided September 27, 1991No. C88-1104YPublishedCited by 69 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

JOHN W. PECK, Senior Circuit Judge.

This three-judge district court was convened pursuant to the en banc decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 925 F.2d 987 (6th Cir.1991), in order to hear this challenge to the constitutionality of the apportionment of the Ohio House of Representatives. Plaintiffs allege that the boundary between House Districts 52 and 53 in Mahoning County deliberately and effectively dilutes the minority vote, and therefore violates the Fifteenth Amendment and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. For the reasons that follow, we find…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Reynolds v. SimsSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  3. Hagans v. LavineSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  4. Shelley v. KraemerSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
  5. Thornburg v. GinglesSupreme Court of the United States · 1986

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

3Cited by69 opinions

  1. Vecinos De Barrio Uno v. City of HolyokeCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1995
  2. Hastert v. State Board of ElectionsDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1991
  3. Turner v. State of Ark.District Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1991
  4. Wilson v. EuCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Rodriguez v. PatakiDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2004

64 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