State ex rel. Hinkle v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Elections

62 Ohio St. 3d 1420
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 24, 1991
Docket91-1845
StatusPublished

This text of 62 Ohio St. 3d 1420 (State ex rel. Hinkle v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Elections) 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. Hinkle v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Elections, 62 Ohio St. 3d 1420 (Ohio 1991).

Opinion

In Mandamus. This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint for a writ of mandamus. Upon consideration of the motion of Kathleen A. Herington to intervene as a respondent,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that said motion to intervene be, and the same is hereby, denied.

Holmes and Resnick, JJ., dissent.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
62 Ohio St. 3d 1420, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-hinkle-v-franklin-cty-bd-of-elections-ohio-1991.