2019 Ohio 4766
Ohio2019Background
- Samuel T. Cramblit II filed a petition to be a nonpartisan mayoral candidate for Ironton on August 7, 2019; the Lawrence County Board of Elections certified him on August 15.
- Incumbent mayor Katrina D. Keith protested Cramblit’s candidacy on October 1, alleging he did not meet the Ironton charter residency requirement of being an elector and resident for five years preceding the election.
- Keith submitted evidence that Cramblit voted in Athens County on November 4, 2014 and registered to vote in Lawrence County on February 16, 2016.
- The board determined on October 22 that Keith’s protest was untimely under the applicable deadlines and therefore took no action or hearing on the protest.
- Keith filed this original, expedited action on October 28 seeking a writ of prohibition to force removal of Cramblit’s name from the November 5, 2019 ballot and to prevent counting any votes for him.
- The Ohio Supreme Court dismissed the claim, concluding the board did not exercise quasi-judicial power by declining to act on an untimely protest.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the board exercised quasi-judicial power by leaving Cramblit on the ballot (thereby subjecting its action to prohibition) | Keith: the board’s inaction allowed an unqualified candidate to remain on the ballot and thus constituted quasi-judicial action subject to review | Board: Keith’s protest was untimely; the board lacked statutory authority to hold a hearing or invalidate the petition and properly declined to act | Court: No quasi-judicial action—board did not conduct a hearing; inaction on an untimely protest is not the exercise of quasi-judicial power, so prohibition is not warranted |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Wright v. Ohio Bur. of Motor Vehicles, 87 Ohio St.3d 184, 718 N.E.2d 908 (1999) (defines quasi-judicial authority as hearing controversies resembling a judicial trial)
- State ex rel. Harbarger v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Elections, 75 Ohio St.3d 44, 661 N.E.2d 699 (1996) (board lacked authority to conduct an untimely protest hearing; prohibited from doing so)