Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Parrott v. Brunner

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 29, 2008No. 2008-0410PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Per curiam

{¶ 1} This is an expedited election action for a writ of prohibition and other writ to prevent respondent, the secretary of state, from enforcing — for the March 4, 2008 primary election — her directive requiring boards of elections to provide an optical-scan ballot to any elector who requests the ballot in lieu of casting a ballot using a direct-recording electronic voting machine. Because relators’ claims are not cognizable in prohibition or in an other writ pursuant to R.C. 2503.40, we deny the writs.

{¶ 2} On January 2, 2008, the respondent, Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, issued…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Herman v. KlopfleischOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  2. State ex rel. Wright v. Ohio Bureau of Motor VehiclesOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  3. State ex rel. Youngstown v. Mahoning County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  4. State ex rel. Baldzicki v. Cuyahoga County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  5. State ex rel. Ruehlmann v. LukenOhio Supreme Court · 1992

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Ohio Ex Rel. Skaggs v. BrunnerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008
  2. State Ex Rel. Scherach v. Lorain County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 2009
  3. State ex rel. LetOhioVote.org v. BrunnerOhio Supreme Court · 2010
  4. State ex rel. Wright v. Cuyahoga County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  5. State ex rel. Scioto Downs, Inc. v. BrunnerOhio Supreme Court · 2009

3 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