The State Ex Rel. Stevens v. Fairfield County Board of Elections.
152 Ohio St. 3d 584
Ohio2018Background
- Jason Stevens sought placement on the May 8, 2018 primary ballot as a candidate for Ohio Democratic Party State Central Committee (20th Senate District).
- Fairfield County Board of Elections voted to deny certification, concluding Stevens’s voting history did not show he was a Democratic Party member.
- Stevens received the board’s denial (Feb 26), requested reconsideration, and submitted affidavits (including one from Ohio Democratic Party counsel); the board adjourned without acting.
- Stevens filed an expedited mandamus complaint (Mar 8) seeking an order compelling the board to certify his nomination.
- Central legal question: whether Stevens met the statutory definition of a party member under R.C. 3513.05 (which the court applied to R.C. 3517.03) and whether the board abused its discretion by rejecting his petition.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Laches (delay) | Stevens acted promptly; his delay was attributable to seeking board reconsideration. | Board: Stevens unreasonably delayed ~10 days after notice before filing. | Court: No laches; delay to seek reconsideration was reasonable. |
| Definition of "member of the party" for central-committee eligibility | R.C. 3513.05(7) is disjunctive: an elector who did not vote in another party’s primary within prior two years qualifies, so Stevens (who hadn’t voted in another party’s primary) is a party member. | Board: The two clauses must be read conjunctively (both prongs required), disqualifying Stevens because he hadn’t voted in a Democratic primary within two years. | Court: Statute is unambiguous; read literally. The "or" is disjunctive; Stevens satisfied the statute and is a party member. |
| Proper use of R.C. 1.02(F) (reading "or" as "and") | N/A (Stevens relied on literal text). | Board invoked R.C. 1.02(F) to argue the statute must be read conjunctively to avoid absurd results. | Court: R.C. 1.02(F) not applicable; no absurdity shown—literal reading stands. |
| Board’s action standard (abuse of discretion) | Board abused discretion by disallowing Stevens despite statutory entitlement. | Board argued its decision was reasonable and reprinting costs would be burdensome. | Court: Board abused its discretion and acted in clear disregard of law; writ granted. |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Waters v. Spaeth, 131 Ohio St.3d 55 (2012) (mandamus elements and standards for election-related relief)
- State ex rel. Brinda v. Lorain Cty. Bd. of Elections, 115 Ohio St.3d 299 (2007) (delay attributable to seeking reconsideration can be reasonable in election cases)
- State ex rel. Holwadel v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Elections, 144 Ohio St.3d 579 (2015) (review standard: fraud, corruption, abuse of discretion, or clear disregard of law)
- State ex rel. Coughlin v. Summit Cty. Bd. of Elections, 136 Ohio St.3d 371 (2013) (party affiliation defined by voting in party primaries; affiliation is self-identification)