Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Essig v. Blackwell

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 21, 2004No. 2004-1603PublishedCited by 37 opinions

1Per curiam

{¶ 1} In this case, we must determine relators’ entitlement to writs of mandamus and prohibition to prevent the Secretary of State from placing a proposed constitutional amendment on Ohio’s November 2, 2004 election ballot. Because we lack jurisdiction over relators’ mandamus claim and because Section lg, Article II of the Ohio Constitution and res judicata bar relators’ prohibition action, we dismiss the mandamus claim and deny the prohibition claim.

{¶ 2} Initiative petitioners, Reverend K. Z. Smith, Lori A. Viars, and Phil Burress, are members of a committee named the Ohio Campaign to…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Brown v. City of DaytonOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  2. State ex rel. Grendell v. DavidsonOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  3. State ex rel. Thurn v. Cuyahoga County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  4. State ex rel. DeBrosse v. CoolOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  5. State ex rel. Youngstown v. Mahoning County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1995

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

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Dispatch Printing Co. v. JohnsonOhio Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Smith v. LeisOhio Supreme Court · 2005
  3. State ex rel. Choices for South-Western City Schools v. AnthonyOhio Supreme Court · 2005
  4. State ex rel. Beacon Journal Publishing Co. v. City of AkronOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  5. State ex rel. Colvin v. BrunnerOhio Supreme Court · 2008

32 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