State ex rel. Grumbles v. Delaware Cty. Bd. of Elections (Slip Opinion), 2021 Ohio 3132

Relator Robert “Ben” Grumbles, elected Orange Township trustee in 2019 to a term beginning Jan. 1, 2020, filed a nominating petition to run Nov. 2, 2021 for a different four‑year trustee term beginning Jan. 1, 2022.
Grumbles’ petition contained sufficient valid signatures and he stated he would resign or vacate his current term if elected to the new seat.
Delaware County Board of Elections refused to certify his nominating petition solely because he currently holds a trustee office, concluding an incumbent cannot run for a different seat on the same township board while midterm.
Grumbles sought an expedited writ of mandamus from the Ohio Supreme Court ordering the board to place him on the ballot; he also sought attorney fees for bad‑faith exclusion.
The court considered whether any statute or clear authority barred a sitting township trustee from running for a different trustee seat, and whether the board abused its discretion.
The court granted the writ, ordering the board to certify Grumbles for the ballot, and denied attorney fees.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
May a sitting township trustee run for election to a different seat on the same board?	Grumbles: No statutory prohibition exists; he meets qualifications and may run for the other term.	Board: Statutory scheme does not authorize a trustee to seek a different seat midterm; analogized to Graves and argued offices are indistinguishable.	Held: No statute bars it; R.C. 505.01 contemplates distinct seats and the board abused discretion in excluding him.
Did the board abuse its discretion in refusing to certify the petition?	Grumbles: Board ignored applicable law and improperly disqualified a qualified candidate.	Board: Interpreted election statutes to disallow such midterm candidacy and raised conflict‑of‑interest concerns about appointing a successor.	Held: Board abused discretion and disregarded law; must certify.
Are attorney fees recoverable for bad faith exclusion?	Grumbles: Board acted in bad faith; its reasons were pretextual.	Board: Acted on an honest (though incorrect) legal view; no dishonest purpose shown.	Held: Denied fees; record shows no evidence of bad faith—only erroneous judgment.

State ex rel. Yeager v. Richland Cty. Bd. of Elections, 136 Ohio St.3d 327 (2013) (mandamus elements for ballot placement)
State ex rel. N. Olmsted v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Elections, 93 Ohio St.3d 529 (2001) (election‑board abuse‑of‑discretion standard)
State ex rel. Graves v. Bernon, 124 Ohio St. 294 (1931) (interpretation of multiseat judicial offices ineligibility context)
State ex rel. Columbia Reserve, Ltd. v. Lorain Cty. Bd. of Elections, 111 Ohio St.3d 167 (2006) (courts decline to add statutory qualifications not enacted by legislature)
State ex rel. Maloney v. Sherlock, 100 Ohio St.3d 77 (2003) (attorney fees require bad faith)
State ex rel. McDougald v. Greene, 161 Ohio St.3d 130 (2020) (bad‑faith standard for awarding fees requires more than negligence)
State ex rel. Fairfield Leader v. Ricketts, 56 Ohio St.3d 97 (1990) (contrived justifications insufficient to show bad faith)