OSU Navigation Bar

Election Law @ Moritz Home Page

Election Law @ Moritz

Election Law @ Moritz


Litigation

 

O'Farrell v. Landis

Case Information

Date Filed: December 24, 2012
State: Ohio
Issue: Election Contest
Courts that Heard this Case: Ohio Supreme Court (Case 12-2151)

Issue:

Whether various election irregularities occurred in Tuscarawas County requiring a recount under Ohio law of absentee and provisional ballots in certain precincts.

Status:

Petition filed 12/24/12. Motion for Hand Count and/or Inspection of Certain Ballots filed 12/28/12. Memo in Opposition filed 12/31/12. Answer filed 1/7/12. Order denying motion for hand count, visual inspection, and recount at this time and Order requiring Boards of Elections to place ballots under seal filed 1/8/13. Answer filed 1/9/13. Motion to Compel Production of Ballots filed 1/11/13. Motion to Dismiss Holmes County Board of Elections filed 1/18/13. O'Farrell's Memo in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss filed 1/22/13. Landis' Memo in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss filed 1/24/13. Answer of Holmes County Board of Elections filed 2/1/13. Evidence of Contestee Landis filed 2/4/13. O'Farrell's Merit Brief filed 2/11/13. Landis' Merit Brief filed 2/19/13. Entry Directing Clerk to file record with Ohio House of Representatives filed 2/22/13. Ohio House committee recommends that full House uphold election result, 5/7/13. Ohio House adopts Resolution 130 upholding election result, 5/22/13.

Ohio Supreme Court Documents

Ohio House of Representatives Documents

Related News Articles

Commentary

Edward B. Foley

Publication of new BALLOT BATTLES book

Edward B. Foley

I'm delighted that Oxford University Press has published my new book Ballot Battles: The History of Disputed Elections in the United States. I've collected links to last week's blogging related to the book's release. 

more commentary...

In the News

Daniel P. Tokaji

What would it take to find out for sure if Ted Cruz (or others like him) is eligible for the presidency?

Professor Daniel P. Tokaji's research was quoted in a Washington Post article:

The most common route for aggrieved partisans, in this case opponents of Cruz, are the federal courts. But the courts are unlikely to go near the question just because someone brings a lawsuit. If some gadfly, for example, were to sue in federal court to keep Cruz off the ballot, the chances of any judge stepping in to settle the question is close to zero. 

There’s little dispute about that according to, among many others, Ohio State University law professor Daniel P. Tokaji, writing in the Michigan Law Review.

more EL@M in the news...

Info & Analysis

New state voting laws face first presidential election test

more info & analysis...