State ex rel. Baker v. Fox
2022 Ohio 667
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2022Background:
- Robert B. Baker filed a quo warranto complaint (Jan. 5, 2022) challenging Matthew A. Fox’s appointment as Uhrichsville Ward 1 council member.
- Fox had been serving as Uhrichsville Council-at-Large; that at-large term expired Dec. 31, 2021, but he was appointed to the Ward 1 seat at a Dec. 9, 2021 council meeting while still holding the at-large seat.
- Fox submitted a resignation to the Board of Elections dated Dec. 10, 2021, purporting to make it effective Dec. 9, 2021 at 9:00 p.m.
- Baker alleges Fox unlawfully held two incompatible council offices at the time of the Ward 1 appointment and seeks Fox’s ouster from the Ward 1 seat.
- The court dismissed the complaint sua sponte under Civ.R. 12(B)(6) for lack of standing because Baker did not claim title or entitlement to the specific office he sought to recover; he only alleged general eligibility to hold council office.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to bring quo warranto | Baker contends Fox unlawfully holds Ward 1 and asks court to oust him | Fox contends (implicitly) the appointment/resignation process made his occupancy lawful; primary defense is procedural standing | Dismissed: Baker lacks standing because he did not claim title or entitlement to the specific office |
| Validity of appointment (incompatible office) | Baker argues Fox held an incompatible office at appointment, making the Ward 1 appointment unlawful | Fox resigned the at-large seat effective Dec. 9, 2021 (9:00 p.m.), aiming to cure any incompatibility | Court did not reach merits due to lack of standing; claim dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Herman v. Klopfleisch, 72 Ohio St.3d 581 (1995) (elements required for quo warranto: office unlawfully held and relator entitled to office)
- State ex rel. Halak v. Cebula, 50 Ohio App.2d 334 (8th Dist. 1976) (private relator must present a good-faith claim of entitlement to the disputed office)
- State ex rel. Annable v. Stokes, 24 Ohio St.2d 32 (1970) (quo warranto dismissed where relators failed to claim title to the contested office)
- State ex rel. Bruggeman v. Ingraham, 87 Ohio St.3d 230 (1999) (sua sponte dismissal for failure to state a claim appropriate when complaint is frivolous or relator cannot prevail)
- In re Lubrizol Shareholders Litigation, 79 N.E.3d 579 (2017) (dismissal for lack of standing is commonly treated as failure to state a claim)