State ex rel. Polo v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Elections, 95-2061

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Ohio
Citation74 Ohio St.3d 143,656 N.E.2d 1277
Docket NumberNo. 95-2061,95-2061
PartiesPOLO v. CUYAHOGA COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS.
Decision Date09 November 1995

Page 143

74 Ohio St.3d 143
656 N.E.2d 1277
[STATE EX REL.] POLO
v.
CUYAHOGA COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS.
No. 95-2061.
Supreme Court of Ohio.
Submitted Oct. 24, 1995.
Decided Nov. 9, 1995.

[656 N.E.2d 1278] Lisa Uffman-Kirsch is a candidate for mayor of the city of North Royalton who is listed on the November 7, 1995 election ballot. Although Uffman-Kirsch's home is located in the city of Broadview Heights, her driveway and mailbox are located in North Royalton. Her mailing address is 3060 Wiltshire Road, North Royalton.

On September 18, 1995, relator, David M. Polo, a resident elector of North Royalton, filed a protest with respondent, Cuyahoga County Board of Elections, challenging the validity of Uffman-Kirsch's mayoral candidacy due to her residential status. On September 19, the board held a hearing on Polo's protest.

At the hearing, Uffman-Kirsch admitted that her home is located in Broadview Heights, although the only street access to her home is through her driveway entrance in North Royalton. Her police, fire, and garbage services are provided by North Royalton. She has always been registered to vote in North Royalton and has never voted in Broadview Heights. According to the board registration manager, the only way the board classifies voting residence is by street address. In accordance with the board's policy, Uffman-Kirsch's voting residence was listed as North Royalton.

Uffman-Kirsch further admitted that her home had a Broadview Heights building permit and that she had paid Broadview Heights taxes on the property from approximately 1989 or 1990 until 1993. Richard Allar, an engineer for both North Royalton and Broadview Heights, confirmed that Uffman-Kirsch's home is located in Broadview Heights. At the conclusion of the hearing, the board denied Polo's protest.

On October 6, 1995, Polo instituted this expedited election case seeking a writ of prohibition to remove Uffman-Kirsch's name from the November 7, 1995

Page 144

election ballot for North Royalton. On October 18, 1995, the board filed an answer and a motion for summary judgment. Uffman-Kirsch has filed a motion to intervene.

Grendell & Marrer Co., L.P.A., Timothy J. Grendell, Independence, and David H. Gunning II, University Heights, for relator.

Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, Patrick J. Murphy and Michael P. Butler, Assistant Prosecuting Attorneys, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Motion to Intervene

As a preliminary matter, Uffman-Kirsch cites Civ.R. 24 in support of her motion to intervene. See S.Ct.Prac.R. X(2) ("All original actions shall proceed under the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure, unless clearly inapplicable."). Civ.R. 24 is generally liberally construed in favor of intervention. See, e.g., State ex rel. LTV Steel Co. v. Gwin (1992), 64 Ohio St.3d 245, 247, 594 N.E.2d 616, 619. Nevertheless, Civ.R. 24(C) sets forth the following requirements for a motion to intervene:

"A person desiring to intervene shall serve a motion to intervene upon the parties as provided in Rule 5. The motion shall state the grounds therefor and shall be accompanied by a pleading setting forth the claim or defense for which intervention is sought. The same procedure shall be followed when a statute of this state gives a right to intervene." (Emphasis added.)

Since Uffman-Kirsch's motion is not accompanied by any pleading, her motion is denied. See...

To continue reading

Request your trial
126 cases
  • Lincoln Elec. Co. v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins., 1:96-CV-0537.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 6th Circuit. United States District Court of Northern District of Ohio
    • May 11, 1998
    ...(d) prejudice to the other party (not inferred from the mere passage of time). State ex rel. Polo v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Elections, 74 Ohio St.3d 143, 145-46, 656 N.E.2d 1277 63. St. Paul has not given sufficient evidence that Lincoln Electric caused unreasonable delay such to prejudice St......
  • State ex rel. Brown v. Ashtabula Cnty. Bd. of Elections, 2014–1405.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Ohio
    • September 16, 2014
    ...or constructive, of the injury or wrong, and (4) prejudice to the other party." State ex rel. Polo v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Elections, 74 Ohio St.3d 143, 145, 656 N.E.2d 1277 (1995). Laches may bar relief in an election-related matter if the person seeking relief fails to act with the " ‘utm......
  • Portage Cty. Bd. of Commrs. v. Akron, 2004-0783.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Ohio
    • March 6, 2006
    ...actual or constructive, of the injury or wrong, and (4) prejudice to the other party." State ex rel. Polo v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Elections (1995), 74 Ohio St.3d 143, 145, 656 N.E.2d 1277. {¶ 82} Thus, the party relying on the defense of laches must demonstrate at least constructive knowled......
  • Omran v. Lucas
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Ohio)
    • December 13, 2021
    ...Invest. Co., LP, 7th Dist. Mahoning No. 17 MA 0101, 2019-Ohio-496, ¶ 40, citing State ex rel. Polo v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Elections, 74 Ohio St.3d 143, 145, 656 N.E.2d 1277 (1995). All four elements must exist for laches to apply. {¶68} The party invoking the doctrine must show the delay c......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT