The State Ex Rel. Miller v. Warren County Bd. of Elections, No. 2011–1469.
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Ohio |
| Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM. |
| Citation | 130 Ohio St.3d 24,955 N.E.2d 379,2011 -Ohio- 4623 |
| Parties | The STATE ex rel. MILLER et al.v.WARREN COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS et al. |
| Decision Date | 15 September 2011 |
| Docket Number | No. 2011–1469. |
130 Ohio St.3d 24
955 N.E.2d 379
2011 -Ohio- 4623
The STATE ex rel. MILLER et al.
v.
WARREN COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS et al.
No. 2011–1469.
Supreme Court of Ohio.
Submitted Sept. 12, 2011.Decided Sept. 15, 2011.
[955 N.E.2d 380]
Francis P. Miller, Thomas E. Anderson, Rickey R. Dotson, and Richard J. Inskeep, pro se.David P. Fornshell, Warren County Prosecuting Attorney, and Keith W. Anderson, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for respondents.PER CURIAM.[Ohio St.3d 24] {¶ 1} This is an expedited election action for writs of prohibition and mandamus to prevent a board of elections and its members from certifying a person's candidacy for city council in the November 8, 2011 general election. Because the board did not exercise quasi-judicial authority and relators had an adequate remedy by way of timely statutory protest to raise their claim, relators are not entitled to the requested extraordinary relief in prohibition, and we deny the writ. In addition, because relators' purported mandamus claim is, in essence, a claim for declaratory and prohibitory injunctive relief, we lack jurisdiction over the claim and dismiss it.
{¶ 2} In 1993, the electors of the city of Mason, Ohio, approved Section 3.02(A) of the Mason Charter, which specified term limits for Mason City Council members.
{¶ 3} On February 9, 2009, Mike Gilb was appointed to the Mason City Council to complete an unexpired term, which ended in December 2009. On November 3, 2009, Gilb resigned as a member of the city council. On November 4, 2009, Gilb was appointed to fulfill a second unexpired term, which ends in December 2011.
[Ohio St.3d 25] {¶ 4} In November 2009, the Mason electorate approved an amendment to the term-limits provision of the city charter, which became effective on January 1, 2010.
[955 N.E.2d 381]
{¶ 5} Relators, Francis P. Miller, Thomas E. Anderson, Rickey R. Dotson, and Richard J. Inskeep, are registered voters and residents of Mason. On June 9, 2011, relators sent respondents, the Warren County Board of Elections and its members, a letter claiming that Gilb, who had taken out candidate petitions for the November 8, 2011 general election for Mason City Council, was ineligible because of the term-limit provisions of the Mason Charter.
{¶ 6} The board of elections considered relators' letter at its July 5, 2011 regular meeting. The board determined that “there was no action for [it] to take at this time and there likely would not be any action in the future” because Gilb had not yet filed a petition to be a candidate for any office and “even if there is a filing as the letter anticipates[,] the determination as to whether or not this person can hold the office in question is a separate matter from if the person can run for the office in question.” 1 The board opined that it “could not legally keep this person from running even if he were to file petitions, which again, he has not.”
{¶ 7} By letter dated July 19, 2011, the director of the board of elections notified relators of the board's decision concerning their letter and concluded, “Should the matter proceed and/or new facts emerge that require the Board to take action they will consult with their statutory coun[sel] (The Warren County Prosecutor's Office) and the Board will take whatever action they deem appropriate then.”
{¶ 8} On August 23, 2011, Gilb filed his nominating petition to be a candidate for Mason City Council at the November 8, 2011 election.
{¶ 9} Instead of filing a written protest with the board of elections against Gilb's petition pursuant to R.C. 3513.263 (“processing of nominating petitions; protests”) and 3501.39 (“grounds for rejection of petition”), 2 three days later, on August 26, relators filed this expedited election action. Relators request a writ of prohibition to prevent respondents from certifying Gilb as a candidate for the office of member of the Mason City Council at the November 8, 2011 general election and a writ of mandamus to compel respondents to sustain what relators [Ohio St.3d 26] refer to as their protest. On September 2, the board and its members filed an answer. The parties then filed briefs and evidence pursuant to the court's accelerated schedule for expedited election cases in S.Ct.Prac.R. 10.9.
{¶ 10} This cause is now before the court for our consideration of the merits.
{¶ 11} Relators request a writ of prohibition to prevent respondents from certifying Gilb as a candidate for the Mason City Council at the November 8, 2011 general...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Shumaker v. Nichols, No. 2012–1905.
...ex rel. Bell v. Pfeiffer, 131 Ohio St.3d 114, 2012-Ohio-54, 961 N.E.2d 181, ¶ 18; State ex rel. Miller v. Warren Cty. Bd. of Elections, 130 Ohio St.3d 24, 2011-Ohio-4623, 955 N.E.2d 379, ¶ 12. “Where jurisdiction is patently and unambiguously lacking, relators need not establish the lack of......
-
State ex rel. Shumaker v. Nichols, No. 2012–1905.
...ex rel. Bell v. Pfeiffer, 131 Ohio St.3d 114, 2012-Ohio-54, 961 N.E.2d 181, ¶ 18;State ex rel. Miller v. Warren Cty. Bd. of Elections, 130 Ohio St.3d 24, 2011-Ohio-4623, 955 N.E.2d 379, ¶ 12. “Where jurisdiction is patently and unambiguously lacking, relators need not establish the lack of ......
-
State ex rel. Dailey v. Dawson, No. 103237.
...rel. Bell v. Pfeiffer, 131 Ohio St.3d 114, 2012-Ohio-54, 961 N.E.2d 181, ¶ 18 ; State ex rel. Miller v. Warren Cty. Bd. of Elections, 130 Ohio St.3d 24, 2011-Ohio-4623, 955 N.E.2d 379, ¶ 12. The relators, however, "need not demonstrate the lack of an adequate remedy if the court's lack of j......
-
State ex rel. Enquirer v. Lyons, Nos. 2012–1924
...rel. Bell v. Pfeiffer, 131 Ohio St.3d 114, 2012-Ohio-54, 961 N.E.2d 181, ¶ 18 ; State ex rel. Miller v. Warren Cty. Bd. of Elections, 130 Ohio St.3d 24, 2011-Ohio-4623, 955 N.E.2d 379, ¶ 12.Superintendence Rules—Right to Access{¶ 13} Effective July 1, 2009, we adopted Rules of Superintenden......
-
State ex rel. Shumaker v. Nichols, No. 2012–1905.
...ex rel. Bell v. Pfeiffer, 131 Ohio St.3d 114, 2012-Ohio-54, 961 N.E.2d 181, ¶ 18; State ex rel. Miller v. Warren Cty. Bd. of Elections, 130 Ohio St.3d 24, 2011-Ohio-4623, 955 N.E.2d 379, ¶ 12. “Where jurisdiction is patently and unambiguously lacking, relators need not establish the lack of......
-
State ex rel. Shumaker v. Nichols, No. 2012–1905.
...ex rel. Bell v. Pfeiffer, 131 Ohio St.3d 114, 2012-Ohio-54, 961 N.E.2d 181, ¶ 18;State ex rel. Miller v. Warren Cty. Bd. of Elections, 130 Ohio St.3d 24, 2011-Ohio-4623, 955 N.E.2d 379, ¶ 12. “Where jurisdiction is patently and unambiguously lacking, relators need not establish the lack of ......
-
State ex rel. Dailey v. Dawson, No. 103237.
...rel. Bell v. Pfeiffer, 131 Ohio St.3d 114, 2012-Ohio-54, 961 N.E.2d 181, ¶ 18 ; State ex rel. Miller v. Warren Cty. Bd. of Elections, 130 Ohio St.3d 24, 2011-Ohio-4623, 955 N.E.2d 379, ¶ 12. The relators, however, "need not demonstrate the lack of an adequate remedy if the court's lack of j......
-
State ex rel. Enquirer v. Lyons, Nos. 2012–1924
...rel. Bell v. Pfeiffer, 131 Ohio St.3d 114, 2012-Ohio-54, 961 N.E.2d 181, ¶ 18 ; State ex rel. Miller v. Warren Cty. Bd. of Elections, 130 Ohio St.3d 24, 2011-Ohio-4623, 955 N.E.2d 379, ¶ 12.Superintendence Rules—Right to Access{¶ 13} Effective July 1, 2009, we adopted Rules of Superintenden......