THE STATE EX REL. GRUMBLES v. DELAWARE COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS
No. 2021-1072
Supreme Court of Ohio
September 13, 2021
Slip Opinion No. 2021-Ohio-3132
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Grumbles v. Delaware Cty. Bd. of Elections, Slip Opinion No. 2021-Ohio-3132.]
NOTICE
This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requestеd to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is published.
SLIP OPINION NO. 2021-OHIO-3132
THE STATE EX REL. GRUMBLES v. DELAWARE COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS.
[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State ex rel. Grumbles v. Delaware Cty. Bd. of Elections, Slip Opinion No. 2021-Ohio-3132.]
Elections—Mandamus—There is no statute that prohibits a township trustee from being a candidate for a different seat on the same board of township trustees—Writ granted.
(No. 2021-1072—Submitted September 8, 2021—Decided September 13, 2021.)
IN
Per Curiam.
{¶ 1} Relator, Robert “Ben” Grumbles, seeks a writ of mandamus ordering respondent, Delaware County Board of Elections, to place him on the November 2, 2021 election ballot as a candidate for a four-year term as an Orange Township trustee to commence on January 1, 2022. The board rеjected Grumbles‘s nominating petition on the sole basis that he is currently serving a different four-year term as an Orange Township trustee that commenced on January 1, 2020. According to the board, Grumbles is ineligible to run for election to an office he already holds.
{¶ 2} We grant the writ. Because there is no statutory рrovision that bars Grumbles from being elected to a different seat on the same board of township trustees, the board of elections abused its discretion and disregarded applicable law in rejecting Grumbles‘s candidacy.
I. Factual and Procedural Background
{¶ 3} A board of township trustees is composed of three members who are elected to staggered terms. Two trustees are elected to four-year terms at an election held in an odd-numbered year, and then a third trustee is elected to a four-year term at a different election held two years later, with each term beginning on the January 1 following the election. See
{¶ 4} At thе 2019 general election, Grumbles was elected as an Orange Township trustee for a four-year term beginning on January 1, 2020. On August 4, 2021, Grumbles filed a nominating petition and statement of candidacy with the board of elections, seeking to run in the November 2, 2021 election for a four-year term as Orange Township trustee beginning on January 1, 2022.
{¶ 5} At a meeting on August 16, the board of elections voted not to сertify his name to the November ballot, on the basis that he already holds the office of Orange Township trustee. Grumbles asked the board to reconsider its decision, and the board held a reconsideration hearing on August 25. Grumbles argued that he was a registered elector and a resident of Orange Township and therefore qualified to run for township trustee for the term beginning on January 1, 2022. Grumbles conceded that if his name were to be placed on the ballot and win in this November‘s election, he would have to resign the term that began on January 1, 2020, upon taking office for the term beginning on January 1, 2022. In support of the vаlidity of his candidacy, Grumbles noted that the board previously allowed a county commissioner who was in the middle of a four-year term to seek election to a seat with a different term on the same board of county commissioners.
{¶ 6} The board voted unanimously to deny reconsideration and to keеp his name off the ballot. Two days later, Grumbles commenced this expedited election action, asking this court to issue a writ of mandamus ordering the board to certify his name for placement on the November 2 ballot as a candidate for Orange Township trustee. Grumbles also seeks recovery of his attorney fees on the basis that the board acted in bad faith in refusing to certify his candidacy.
{¶ 7} The parties have submitted evidence and filed briefs in accordance with
II. Analysis
{¶ 8} To be entitled to a writ of mandamus, Grumbles must establish by clear and convincing evidence (1) a clear legal right to be placed on the ballot as a candidate for township trustee, (2) a clear legal duty on the part of the board to place his name on the ballot, and (3) the lack of an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law. See State ex rel. Yeager v. Richland Cty. Bd. of Elections, 136 Ohio St.3d 327, 2013-Ohio-3862, 995 N.E.2d 228, ¶ 15. Because of the proximity of the November 2 election, Grumbles lacks an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law. Id. at ¶ 16. As to the first two elements, Grumbles must show that the board engaged in fraud, corruption, an abuse of discretion, or a clear disregard of the applicable law. State ex rel. N. Olmsted v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Elections, 93 Ohio St.3d 529, 532, 757 N.E.2d 314 (2001).
{¶ 9} Grumbles does not allege fraud or corruption. Accordingly, our inquiry is whether the board abused its discretion or failed to follow clearly established law in refusing to certify Grumbles‘s candidacy for the November ballot.
A. May Grumbles Run for a Different Seat on the Same Board?
{¶ 10}
In each township there shall be a board of township trustees consisting of three members. Two of such trustees shall be elected at the general election in nineteen forty-nine and quadrennially thereafter, in each township, who shall hold office for a term of four years, commencing on the first day of January next after their election. The third trustee shall be electеd at the general election in nineteen fifty-one and quadrennially thereafter, in each township, who shall hold office for a term of four years, commencing on the first day of January next after the person‘s election.
{¶ 11} Grumbles was elected to office in the 2019 general election as the “third trustee” defined by
{¶ 12} A board of elections shall accept any candidate‘s petition “unless * * * the petition violates the requirements of [
{¶ 13} In support of its position, the board cites State ex rel. Graves v. Bernon, 124 Ohio St. 294, 178 N.E. 267 (1931). In Graves, a county board of elections rejected Graves‘s petition to be a candidate for
Here is but one office and but a single term. The judges who are to be elected all fill the same term of office; they do not fill distinct offices, nor do they perform different functiоns, but all perform the same duties during the period of their same official term.
Id. at 298. The board analogizes this description of the municipal-court judgeships at issue in Graves to the office of township trustee, which the board argues “does not have separate and identifiable seats.”
{¶ 14} Graves is inapt, however, because it says nothing about the ability of an incumbent of an office on a multiseat board to run for election to a different seat on the same board. Moreover, the board‘s analogy is flawed because it is belied by the applicable statutory language.
{¶ 15} The board‘s next argument is similarly flawed. The board recognizes that elected officials often run for another elected office while continuing to hold the office for which they were originally elected. Thus, for example, the board deems it permissible for a sitting cоunty commissioner to run for another seat on the same board of commissioners because
{¶ 16} But the board fails to show why this is a distinction that makes a difference. In this case, Grumbles currently holds the office of township trustee with a term that began on January 1, 2020, and he seeks to run for a seat with a different four-year term on the same board of township trustees, beginning on January 1, 2022. There is nothing in the statutory scheme governing township trustees or elections generally that prohibits Grumbles from seeking to be elected to a seat with a different term than the one he is currently serving.
{¶ 17} Finally, the board also contends that if Grumbles were elected in November, he would be involved in appointing his successor to the trustee position he would vacate. See
{¶ 18} The board‘s argument is not persuasive, because it is grounded in supposed policy considerations that are not set forth in the statutes governing election of township trustees. When the General Assembly has prohibited candidacies, it has done so expressly. See, e.g.,
{¶ 19} Grumbles meets the statutory qualifications to run for Orange Township trustee, and there is no statutory provision that prohibits him from being a candidate for a different seat on the same board. Accordingly, the board abused its discretion and disregarded applicable legаl authority in declining to certify his candidacy for the November general election ballot.
B. Attorney Fees
{¶ 20} Grumbles also seeks to recover his attorney fees on the basis that the board excluded him from the ballot in bad faith. See State ex rel. Maloney v. Sherlock, 100 Ohio St.3d 77, 2003-Ohio-5058, 796 N.E.2d 897, ¶ 55 (absent a statute allowing attorney feеs as cost, the prevailing party is not entitled to attorney fees unless the opposing party acted in bad faith). To recover attorney fees based on “bad faith,” Grumbles must show more than the board‘s negligence or bad judgment on the part of the board. State ex rel. McDougald v. Greene, 161 Ohio St.3d 130, 2020-Ohio-3686, 161 N.E.3d 575, ¶ 26. The phrase connotes a dishonest purpose, moral obliquity, conscious wrongdoing, or some ulterior motive or ill will. Id.
{¶ 21} According to Grumbles, the board‘s justifications for rejecting his candidacy are “so farfetched and fantastical that they can only be considered pretextual, not a bona fide intеrpretation or application of the laws governing access to the ballot.” Grumbles does not explain, however, what he believes the board‘s actual motives were. That is, he does not present evidence from which to infer that the board was motivated by something other than an honest bеlief that his candidacy was not permitted by law.
III. Conclusion
{¶ 23} For the foregoing reasons, we grant a writ of mandamus ordering the board to certify Grumbles‘s name for placement on the November 2, 2021 ballot as a candidate for Orange Township trustee. We deny Grumbles‘s request for attorney fees.
Writ granted.
O‘CONNOR, C.J., and KENNEDY, FISCHER, DEWINE, DONNELLY, STEWART, and BRUNNER, JJ., concur.
McTigue & Colombo, L.L.C., Derek S. Clingеr, Donald J. McTigue, and J. Corey Colombo, for relator.
Melissa A. Schiffel, Delaware County Prosecuting Attorney, and Mark W. Fowler and Vince J. Villio, Assistant Prosecuting Attorneys, for respondent.
Notes
The board of county commissioners shall consist of three persons who shall be elected as follows:
(A) In November, 1974, and quadrennially thereafter, one county commissioner shall be elected to take office on the first day of January following.
(B) In November, 1972, and quadrennially thereafter, two commissioners shall be elected. The term of one of such commissioners shall commence on the second day of January next after his election, and the term of the other commissioner shall commence on the third day of January next after his election.