1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Ohio
  4. 62 Ohio
  5. 62 Ohio St.3d 145 (1991)
 

STATE, EX REL. HINKLE v. FRANKLIN CTY. BD. OF ELECTIONS

No. 91-1845.

62 Ohio St.3d 145 (1991)

THE STATE, EX REL. HINKLE, v. FRANKLIN COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS ET AL.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

Decided October 22, 1991.

Opinion announced October 25, 1991.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Manley, Burke & Fischer, Timothy M. Burke and Carol S. Wood, for relator.

Michael Miller, Prosecuting Attorney, and Harland H. Hale, for respondent.

Lee I. Fisher, Attorney General, and Nancy Johnston, for intervenor-respondent Secretary of State, Bob Taft.

Bruce E. Bailey, Law Director, and William J. McLoughlin, urging denial for amicus curiae, city of Westerville.

Donald J. McTigue, urging denial for amici curiae, Cooker Restaurant Corp. et al.

Per Curiam.

The principal issue presented in this case is: Does Am.Sub. H.B. No. 200 violate Section 15(D), Article II of the Ohio Constitution in that the bill contains more than one subject? For reasons that follow, we hold that Am.Sub.H.B. No. 200, as it was enacted, is unconstitutional under Section 15(D), Article II, and, therefore, that the board of elections cannot invalidate this local option petition pursuant to Section 7 of that bill. Having held...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases