State ex rel. Jones v. LaRose, 2022 Ohio 2445

Background

Ohio law set a 90-day partisan filing deadline of February 2, 2022 for the May 3 primary (R.C. 3513.05). After state redistricting maps were invalidated, a federal court moved some primaries to August 2, 2022.
On May 28, Secretary LaRose issued Directive 2022-34 implementing a compressed calendar and instructing county boards to reject declarations filed after the statutory February 2 deadline.
Relator Erik W. Jones filed a declaration of candidacy and petition on April 27, 2022 seeking the Republican State Central Committee ballot; the Lorain County Board of Elections notified him on June 2 that it would not certify his candidacy as untimely.
This Court previously granted relief in State ex rel. DeMora v. LaRose to several relators who had missed the February 2 deadline but had filed more than 90 days before the new August 2 date.
Jones filed this mandamus action on July 1, 2022 seeking orders compelling the secretary and county boards to accept his filing (or to extend the filing window). The Court denied relief on the ground of laches, citing Jones’s delay and prejudice to election administration.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Jones has a clear legal right to have his April 27 filing treated as timely under the Court's reasoning in DeMora	Jones: DeMora’s logic applies—he filed more than 90 days before the rescheduled Aug. 2 primary, so his filing should be accepted	LaRose/board: Even if DeMora is instructive, Jones’s inaction after the board rejection bars relief	Denied on laches grounds; the court did not reach or grant affirmative DeMora-style relief for Jones
Whether laches bars mandamus in this expedited election case	Jones: He sought relief from respondents and tried to obtain counsel; delay excused by attempts at reconsideration and counsel search	Respondents: Jones unreasonably delayed after the June 2 rejection; delay caused prejudice to election administration (UOCAVA/absentee deadlines, early voting)	Court: Laches applies — unreasonable delay, no adequate excuse, knowledge of rejection, and material prejudice; writ denied
Whether the UOCAVA/early-voting timetable precludes post-deadline relief	Jones: (implicit) relief can be fashioned without undue prejudice; DeMora shows post-UOCAVA relief may be ordered	Respondents: Jones filed after key deadlines (UOCAVA date passed) and after ballots needed finalization, causing actionable prejudice	Court: Prejudice established (June 17 UOCAVA date passed before suit); laches dispositive
Whether Secretary Directive 2022-34 improperly enforced the February 2 deadline after the primary was rescheduled	Jones: DeMora supports treating filing deadline relative to new primary date	LaRose: Directive reflects statutory filing deadline; enforcement reasonable pending litigation	Court did not grant relief invalidating the directive for Jones because laches barred his claim

Key Cases Cited

State ex rel. Syx v. Stow City Council, 161 Ohio St.3d 201, 2020-Ohio-4393, 161 N.E.3d 639 (relators must act with utmost diligence in election cases)
State ex rel. Carrier v. Hilliard City Council, 144 Ohio St.3d 592, 2016-Ohio-155, 45 N.E.3d 1006 (elements of laches in election context)
State ex rel. Monroe v. Mahoning Cty. Bd. of Elections, 137 Ohio St.3d 62, 2013-Ohio-4490, 997 N.E.2d 524 (laches may bar relief in election matters)
State ex rel. Valore v. Summit Cty. Bd. of Elections, 87 Ohio St.3d 144, 718 N.E.2d 415 (unreasonable delay that prevents decision before absentee deadlines is prejudicial)
State ex rel. Steele v. Morrissey, 103 Ohio St.3d 355, 2004-Ohio-4960, 815 N.E.2d 1107 (prejudice to absentee-voter protections can be dispositive)
State ex rel. Stevens v. Fairfield Cty. Bd. of Elections, 152 Ohio St.3d 584, 2018-Ohio-1151, 99 N.E.3d 376 (seeking reconsideration from a board can excuse some delay if supported by evidence)