2024 Ohio 4933
Ohio2024Background
- Marcell Strbich filed a mandamus action against the Montgomery County Board of Elections, seeking to compel the Board to properly train precinct election officials on unacceptable forms of photo ID, specifically those issued to noncitizens, before the November 2024 general election.
- Ohio law and directives from the Secretary of State require boards of elections to train all precinct election officials (PEOs) using specific training materials and to address both acceptable and unacceptable photo IDs.
- In late September 2024, Strbich and other PEOs attended Board training sessions, which did not include instruction on identifying or handling unacceptable photo IDs issued to noncitizens, in violation of Secretary of State Directive 2024-09.
- After being notified of the omission, the Board updated its training materials and began using them in training sessions starting the evening of September 25 for PEOs and September 29 for voting-location managers.
- The Board indicated it would also email the updated materials to previously trained officials but, as of the court hearing, had not yet done so.
- The court considered whether the Board had fulfilled its legal duty, whether Strbich had a clear right to relief, and the mootness of the requested relief for officials already retrained under updated materials.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Board's duty to provide Directive 2024-09-compliant PEO training | Board has a clear legal duty to provide mandated training | Does not contest the duty exists | Board has a legal duty; element met |
| Clear legal right to receive correct training | PEOs must receive updated training, including plaintiff | Case is moot due to future and recent updated training | Moot for PEOs trained after 9/25 and VLMs after 9/29; not moot before |
| Adequate remedy in ordinary course | No due to proximity of the election | Not contested | No adequate remedy; element met |
| Method of training delivery (in-person vs. email) | Only in-person training satisfies the legal duty | Email is sufficient per the directive & not otherwise required | Emailing updated training materials suffices; in-person not required |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Waters v. Spaeth, 131 Ohio St. 3d 55 (Ohio 2012) (boards of elections have a duty to follow Secretary of State directives)
- State ex rel. Grendell v. Geauga Cty. Bd. of Commrs., 168 Ohio St.3d 360 (Ohio 2022) (court must dismiss moot cases)
- State ex rel. Carlton v. Heekin, 166 Ohio St.3d 399 (Ohio 2021) (mandamus case moot if the requested act is performed)