State ex rel. Maumee v. Lucas Cty. Bd. of Elections
2024 Ohio 5304
Ohio Ct. App.2024Background
- The City of Maumee passed an ordinance in March 2023, which a resident, Colleen LaChapelle, sought to challenge via a referendum petition.
- The City initially refused to transmit the petition to the Lucas County Board of Elections, citing deficiencies, but the Ohio Supreme Court compelled transmission.
- The Board of Elections overruled the City's objections to the petition in April 2024.
- The City filed for a writ of prohibition in May 2024, seeking to prevent the referendum from going on the November 2024 ballot, arguing certification deficiencies.
- The trial court granted summary judgment to the Board, finding no defect in the referendum petition, and denied the City's motion.
- On appeal, the City raised new arguments, including a request to prohibit the votes on the referendum from being tabulated, and the Board, for the first time, raised the defense of laches (undue delay).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the City is entitled to a writ of prohibition | LaChapelle's referendum petition was deficient and not properly certified, so ballot placement is improper. | Petition met all requirements; City's objections were unfounded. | City is not entitled; no defect found in the petition. |
| Whether laches (unreasonable delay) bars the City's claim | City argues Board waived laches defense by not raising it in trial court. | Board claims City's delayed filing was prejudicial and bars relief. | Laches applies; City's delay was unreasonable and prejudicial. |
| Whether new relief can be granted on appeal | City asks court to also prohibit vote tabulation, beyond trial court relief sought. | Board disputes court’s authority to grant unalleged, late-raised relief. | Court cannot grant wholly new forms of relief on appeal. |
| Whether Board waived the laches defense by not raising it below | City relies on expedited case authority; says laches is waived if not timely asserted. | Board points out non-waiver in non-expedited election cases in Ohio law. | Board did not waive laches defense in this non-expedited case. |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. LaChapelle v. Harkey, 2023-Ohio-2723 (Ohio 2023) (Ohio Supreme Court compelled transmission of referendum petition to the board)
- State ex rel. Fishman v. Lucas Cty. Bd. of Elections, 2007-Ohio-5583 (Ohio 2007) (distinguishes election and non-election laches waiver)
- State ex rel. Ohio Democratic Party v. LaRose, 2024-Ohio-4953 (Ohio 2024) (clarifies promptness requirement and prejudice in election cases due to laches)
- State ex rel. Hildreth v. LaRose, 2023-Ohio-3667 (Ohio 2023) (waiver of laches in expedited election cases)
- State ex rel. Syx v. Stow City Council, 2020-Ohio-4393 (Ohio 2020) (delays of even a few weeks can constitute laches in election litigation)
- State ex rel. Pennington v. Bivens, 2021-Ohio-3134 (Ohio 2021) (prejudice in laches often tied to absentee ballot delays in election cases)