History
  • No items yet
midpage
State ex rel. Schultz v. Cuyahoga County Board of Elections
357 N.E.2d 1079
Ohio
1976
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

The referendum petition submitted by relators does not indicate anywhere that one of the paragraphs included in the title of the resolution, to be voted on was- hot adopted by the Olmsted Township Board of Trustees. It is apparent, therefore, that the: referendum petition does not fairly and accurately present the issues sought to be submitted to the electorate. Markus v. Bd. of Elections (1970), 22 Ohio St. 2d 197.

...Accordingly, the judgment of the .Court of Appeals, denying the writ of mandamus, is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

O’NEnÍL, C. J., HERBERT, CORRIGAN, STERN, .CELEBREZZE, Stephenson and P. Brown, JJ., concur.

Stephenson, J.,' of the Fourth Appellate District, fitting for IV. Brown, j. ■ . . • ‘i • ■

Case Details

Case Name: State ex rel. Schultz v. Cuyahoga County Board of Elections
Court Name: Ohio Supreme Court
Date Published: Dec 15, 1976
Citation: 357 N.E.2d 1079
Docket Number: No. 76-500
Court Abbreviation: Ohio
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.