In the case State ex rel. Rhodes v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Elections, Slip Opinion No. 2021-Ohio-3209, the Ohio Supreme Court held that a petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the board of elections to make changes to ballot language for a proposed amendments to city charter should be granted in part and denied in part.
Here, four individuals filed an action against the board of elections arguing that the ballot language for the upcoming November 2021 election misrepresents the proposed amendments and omits material information.
The Ohio Supreme Court found that the board of elections abused its discretion in only preparing certain ballot language for the proposed amendment. However, the Court also found that the individual’s failed to show that the board had a duty to add additional explanatory language to the ballot that was already portraying accurate information. As such, the Court granted the writ in part and denied the writ in part.
To read this case, click here.
Authors: Matthew John Markling and the McGown & Markling Team.
Note: This blog entry does not constitute – nor does it contain – legal advice. Legal jurisprudence is like the always-changing Midwestern weather. As a result, this single blog entry cannot substitute for consultation with a McGown & Markling attorney. If legal advice is needed with respect to a specific factual situation, please feel free to contact a McGown & Markling attorney.