In the case of Cozad v. Ohio Elections Comm., 2023-Ohio-839, an appellate court held that the court did not have jurisdiction to decide whether the commission erred in rejecting a protective order as the rejection was not a final order and did not affect a substantial “right [in] the United States Constitution, the Ohio Constitution, a statute, the common law, or a rule of procedure entitles a person to enforce or protect.” 2023-Ohio-839 at ¶ 20.
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.