State ex rel. Ellis v. Sulligan

Ohio Supreme Court

State ex rel. Ellis v. Sulligan

215 N.E.2d 716, 6 Ohio St. 2d 65

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedApril 8, 1966

DocketNo. 40073

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 215 N.E.2d 716 (State ex rel. Ellis v. Sulligan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State ex rel. Ellis v. Sulligan, 215 N.E.2d 716, 6 Ohio St. 2d 65 (Ohio 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The declaration of candidacy recites that “* # # j hereby declare that I desire to be a candidate * * * for election to the office of Judge — Common Pleas Court -1-2-67 for the Pull Term ending — 1-1-1973.”

Only one county (Mahoning) is mentioned in the declaration and petition. The relator and the electors signing the petition all lived in Mahoning County, the petition was filed in Mahoning County and respondents do not contest the statement in relator’s brief that there was an election to be held for judge of the Common Pleas Court in Mahoning County for the term from January 2, 1967, to January 1, 1973. The [66]*66relator, by his declaration and petition, conld not qualify as a candidate for judge in any county other than Mahoning. The relator has sufficiently complied with the statutory requirements. A writ of mandamus is allowed.

Writ allowed.

Taut, 0. J., ZimmermaN, Matthias, O’Neill, Herbert, Schneider and Brown, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

The declaration of candidacy recites that “* # # j hereby declare that I desire to be a candidate * * * for election to the office of Judge — Common Pleas Court -1-2-67 for the Pull Term ending — 1-1-1973.”

Only one county (Mahoning) is mentioned in the declaration and petition. The relator and the electors signing the petition all lived in Mahoning County, the petition was filed in Mahoning County and respondents do not contest the statement in relator’s brief that there was an election to be held for judge of the Common Pleas Court in Mahoning County for the term from January 2, 1967, to January 1, 1973. The [66]*66relator, by his declaration and petition, conld not qualify as a candidate for judge in any county other than Mahoning. The relator has sufficiently complied with the statutory requirements. A writ of mandamus is allowed.

Writ allowed.

Taut, 0. J., ZimmermaN, Matthias, O’Neill, Herbert, Schneider and Brown, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

215 N.E.2d 716, 6 Ohio St. 2d 65, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-ellis-v-sulligan-ohio-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack