Legal Opinion

Christy v. Summit County Board of Elections

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 9, 1996No. 96-2066PublishedCited by 58 opinions

1Per curiam

Relators assert that they are entitled to the requested relief in prohibition because the initiative petition language for the proposed ordinance contained argument, misleading statements, and material omissions. In order for a writ of prohibition to issue, relators must establish that (1) the board is about to *37exercise judicial or quasi-judicial power, (2) the exercise of such power is legally unauthorized, and (3) if the writ is denied, they will suffer injury for which no other adequate remedy exists. State ex rel. Harbarger v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Elections (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 44, 45,…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Gaskins v. ShiplevyOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. State ex rel. Thurn v. Cuyahoga County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Markus v. Trumbull County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1970
  4. State ex rel. Youngstown v. Mahoning County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Jurcisin v. Cuyahoga County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1988

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

3Cited by58 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Cooker Restaurant Corp. v. Montgomery County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  2. State ex rel. DeBrosse v. CoolOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  3. State ex rel. Ditmars v. McSweeneyOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  4. State Ex Rel. Bardwell v. Cuyahoga County Board of CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 2010
  5. State ex rel. Baldzicki v. Cuyahoga County Board of ElectionsOhio Supreme Court · 2000

53 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