In re Contested Election of November 2, 1993 Concerning Issue No. 9, Referendum of Ordinance No. 137-92
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
As a preliminary matter, appellants have moved to strike appellees’ brief because it contains matters in its appendix which are not part of the record. Appellees concede that their brief contains documents which are not in the record. It is axiomatic that a reviewing court cannot add matter to the record before it, which was not part of the trial court’s proceedings. State v. Ishmail (1978), 54 Ohio St.2d 402, 8 O.O.3d 405, 377 N.E.2d 500, paragraph one of the syllabus; State v. Davis (1992), 63 Ohio St.3d 44, 46, 584 N.E.2d 1192, 1195, fn. 2. Therefore, appellants’ motion is granted in part,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- State v. IshmailOhio Supreme Court · 1978
- State ex rel. Carter v. SchottenOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- State ex rel. Chavis v. Sycamore City School District Board of EducationOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- State v. DavisOhio Supreme Court · 1992
- State ex rel. Richard v. Board of Trustees of the Police & Firemen's Disability & Pension FundOhio Supreme Court · 1994
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- State v. LongOhio Court of Appeals · 1998
- State ex rel. Fogle v. SteinerOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- State ex rel. Cooker Restaurant Corp. v. Montgomery County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1997
- State ex rel. Ascani v. Stark County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- Maschari v. ToneOhio Supreme Court · 2004
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.